# I want to take a shot at critiqing!



## karliejaye (Nov 19, 2011)

Pretty good. Whenever I evaluate a horse's conformation, I keep in mind what the horse will be used for, what level and intensity and the severity of the conformation fault.
For example, say two horses both have open hock angles (too straight behind). One is going to be used for trail riding occasional schooling shows in trail and western pleasure. Two is going to be used for Prelim and Intermediate 3 day eventing. In horse One, the hocks would be a very minor flaw, something to keep an eye on. In horse Two, depending how straight the hock is, it could be a big issue.


In the horse above, I see a downhill balance (look at the point of the croup and the wither, then the point of buttock and point of shoulder, then the stifle and elbow, all 3 contribute to balance) but not extreme. I tend to have an eye for English horses (eventing particularly) and to me his shoulder looks a tad upright, which may limit his stride and scope. A bit tied in under the knee. I agree, he is standing under himself behind, slight sickle, but not major, could be how he's standing.
Looks like a solid, usable all around horse. I don't see anything that screams "major issues". A few limiting factors, but almost all horses have some of those.


A great book to learn the impacts of conformation is "Conformation and Performance" by Nancy Loving. Instead of just pointing out flaws, she talks about the strengths and weaknesses of each, which breeds tend to have them, and things to consider to help a horse with those flaws.


----------



## Zexious (Aug 2, 2013)

Subbing!
Good thread <3


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

Thanks!


I saw the downhill thing, but couldn't think of the right word so I said butt high. ^^


What do you mean by upright shoulder? To me it looks well set, but I don't know what upright means exactly and you said it wasn't bad. Also what does "tied under" mean? You mentioned that in his knee. 


I'll have to check out the book and see if I can get it. That's cool to consider effects of the flaws, not just what those flaws are. I'll have to read up on that.


----------



## Prairie (May 13, 2016)

I agree with Karliejaye but would add that he doesn't have a clean throat latch with that thickness in his neck where it ties into the jaw. His underline is short compared to his topline which will limit his versatility for English disciplines.


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

Prairie said:


> I agree with Karliejaye but would add that he doesn't have a clean throat latch with that thickness in his neck where it ties into the jaw. His underline is short compared to his topline which will limit his versatility for English disciplines.


 
By not a clean throat latch do you mean he doesn't have a clearly defined chin/lower jaw? In other words his thick neck blocks the area where the throatlatch would go too much?


I didn't think about the top and bottom line. That's a good point, but why does it limit his versatility? I'm just curious.


----------



## Prairie (May 13, 2016)

Yes, the throat latch area is not clean which will limit how he carries his head and balances. Normally you want a longer underline than top line since that permits the horse to have a better reach with his hind hooves, leading to a smoother ride and more flexibility to do lateral work.


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

Prairie said:


> Yes, the throat latch area is not clean which will limit how he carries his head and balances. Normally you want a longer underline than top line since that permits the horse to have a better reach with his hind hooves, leading to a smoother ride and more flexibility to do lateral work.



Oh okay. Nice to know.


To me it looks like his underline and topline are close to the same length. Maybe I'm looking at the wrong stretch of his body? Where are those two lines measured exactly, I think I know but could be wrong.


----------



## Prairie (May 13, 2016)

The top- and under- lines are about the same length on this horse......you want that underline noticeably longer.


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

I just found this really nice looking article about horse balance conformation. Do you guys think it's accurate?


Evaluating Horse Conformation | Publications | UGA Extension


----------



## Prairie (May 13, 2016)

It's one of the better conformation evaluation articles I've read. Then the challenge becomes recognizing the flaws in a particular horse once you know what you should look for on paper. Think of it as the difference of learning how to count change in school and actually counting change in as a retail check out cashier since you'll have a lot of distractions to deal with. Coloring alone can make evaluating conformation interesting!


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

Ooh, I didn't think about the influence of color. I guess certain colors do change the way our eyes view something, I wonder what colors would be the hardest to judge, though I have a feeling that very loud patterns would throw your eye off the most. In contrast to a solid black horse, where there's nothing to draw your focus away from the horse's structure.


Interesting thought.


----------



## Prairie (May 13, 2016)

Yes, the loud colored patterns like pinto and appaloosa can distort how the eye views the horse.


----------



## Smilie (Oct 4, 2010)

I agree that he is built slightly downhill.
When you first look at a horse, you look at over all balance. If you devide the horse in thirds, that is easy to see
He is front end heavy, but does have a nice short back, in relationship to his under line-they are not the same!
Hocks are too far off the ground, for a stock horse, and he is slightly camped out.
Slope of shoulder looks good to me.
Yes, throatlatch could be cleaner, but I suspect he is a stud, and has some secondary stallion charasteristics


----------



## Smilie (Oct 4, 2010)

Prairie said:


> I agree with Karliejaye but would add that he doesn't have a clean throat latch with that thickness in his neck where it ties into the jaw. His underline is short compared to his topline which will limit his versatility for English disciplines.


First he is a stock horse, so you take into consideration as to how he is built , far as a working horse. His hocks are too high off the ground, for quick athletic movement, and he is front end heavy, thus will lack that rear end power to some degree.
Also, far as I know, regardless of discipline, a short back, compared to underline length is desired, as long backed horses are weak backed, and find hindend engagement difficult
His shoulder has a nice slope, maybe distorted by his color pattern, but look at the true angle, and not the color pattern


----------



## DraftyAiresMum (Jun 1, 2011)

A loud/busy background on the pic, as well as angle of the sun and brightness can distort the way a horse looks, too, even if they're set up properly.

Look at this pic of my gelding. He's standing fairly square (pic may be at a slight angle toward his front), but the busy background and the bright (midday) sun hitting his shiny coat make it almost impossible to tell some finer details. His loud coloring doesn't help.



This one is slightly better, but he's not set up very well (and yes, I know his hooves are long...they have since been taken care of...this was last summer):



However, once you get used to seeing certain flaws, they're more recognizable, even if the horse isn't standing exactly square or the angle of the pic is off.


----------



## Smilie (Oct 4, 2010)

Here you go- a stock horse judging clinic, where you can place three horses, and then see how and why the judge placed them

Horse And Rider > Conformation Clinic | Horse&Rider


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

I did the stock horse judging thing an got all three of them right! mg: With that said, I second guessed myself to get it right. I don't agree with the number one because she's butthigh and she looks too thickly muscled. Because of that, I would have picked the second place to win that. She's more appealing to me.


Like I said previously, I'm not sure how to judge shoulder angle. That's the biggest thing I'm confused with I think. One person said the shoulder was a little upright, Smilie said it was good, how do you judge that??? Plus (and I know there are different opinions) there's different things said regarding his topline and underline. :shrug:


Smilie why do you say that he's front end heavy and camped out (not sure what those mean). Also, where do you see his topline and underline not being the same length? (unless I read your post wrong). One last thing, what do you mean by "secondary stallion characteristics"?


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

i have 3 horses i will post for you to try an tear apart  it will have to be after work though.


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

KigerQueen said:


> i have 3 horses i will post for you to try an tear apart  it will have to be after work though.


 
Awesome! Thank you Kiger! 


PS: I'm going to be honest to the best of my knowledge, but sorry in advance if I say they don't look right and they're really well built, because I might have some of it totally wrong. ^^


----------



## Prairie (May 13, 2016)

BlindHorse, just remember we learn from our mistakes......and that conformation judging is often a matter of personal preference and opinion. I've shown a horse in a halter classes with 3 different judges , and the horse was place from first and third to not even being placed!


----------



## Saranda (Apr 14, 2011)

I'll try to get a conformation photo of my boy tomorrow for you to practice on.  And I'm okay with honesty - I've had him evaluated for fun and know his flaws pretty well.


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

Thanks you guys! You're awesome. 


I don't know of anywhere else that I can get practice on this, because I don't know any people that know about conformation! You guys are so helpful.


And I know Prairie, I just wanted to let Kiger know that I had nothing against her horses, lol. I can't wait to get feedback on those critiques, because I want to know as much as I can learn about this.


----------



## Smilie (Oct 4, 2010)

Here is agood link for you
There is halter, which often has trends, and where form to function is never tested, as many of those top halter horses are never ridden. 
Then there is conformation evaluation, as it relates to 'form to function'
Halter itself, has become specialized, just like any other discipline, where 'more becomes better, and that 'more' never tested to staying sound under work
Thus the heavy muscled bodies on AQHA halter horses, often with small feet, the 'teacup muzzles and extreme level top line of Arabian halter horses, the cow hocks of draft horses, and the list goes on.
This point is important to understand, the fact that halter, in upper end of any breed, often has left the criteria of being tested 'form to function, with that animal staying sound under work
Thus, we were lucky in Alberta, to have had the Horse Improvement program, where horses one and two year olds, were scored, as to form to function, with major and minor faults listed. Unlike a class where horses are just placed, with placings from first on down, even if the entire class is of poor quality, a conformation evaluation score can have several horses score 'Classic' (75 % and over,or none in that class
The class was scored by three judges, with one being an equine vet. Movement was judged, trotting out on a large triangle. Written scores by each judge was given
Here is a link, and by studying it, you will grasp an idea of what is involved, and how placings alone, esp under judges at local shows, often not even carded, mean not much
Correct conformation, is correct conformation,no matter the breed, as is athletic movement (impulsion, lightness, rhythm and correct travel)
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/hrs5297


----------



## Smilie (Oct 4, 2010)

I don't know why it won't paste correctly, but if you google:
Alberta horse Improvement conformation scoring, it will come up

I will paste some of it.

Horses are scored in each of five categories:
Front limbs
Hind limbs
Head, neck, body and balance
Athletic movement, and
Type.
In using the system, a standard of 20 points in each category is used.
Scores of 18, 19 or 20 are considered excellent and reflect correctness or excellence. These scores tell the breeder he is approaching the ideal.
Scores of 15, 16 or 17 are considered good and reflect that little is wrong but there is considerable room for improvement.
Scores of 12, 13 or 14 are considered fair and reflect the faults that at present do not greatly affect usefulness but will greatly reduce value.
Scores of 9, 10 or 11 are considered poor and reflect serious faults that affect the horse's usefulness, soundness and marketability.
This allows evaluators to give credit where credit is due and be critical when warranted. For example, if a horse has exceptional type, but offset knees, the horse may be scored 19 or 20 for type and 9 or 10 for front limbs. If a horse scores less than 10 in any category, the scores are not totalled and the horse is not classified.
Front Limbs (20 points)

Evaluators appraise the front feet, front legs, knees and shoulder from the front and side at the walk, trot and standing.

Horses score 18, 19 or 20 for moving and standing particularly straight, for having exceptional bone, short cannon bones, long forearm, long sloping shoulder, etc.
Horses score 15, 16 or 17 for minor conformation faults which do not normally lead to unsoundness.
Horses would score 12, 13 or 14 where faults exist that may not greatly affect soundness but may limit performance.
Horses would score 9, 10 or 11 for major conformation faults which affect soundness and performance (evaluator's opinion).
.
Minor Faults Major Faults
toe in or out contracted heels
winging or paddling excessively upright pastern
upright pastern excessively fine bone
straight shoulder calf knees
base narrow offset knees
base wide excessively tied-in behind
small feet base narrow, toe out
slightly calf kneed excessively small feet
slightly offset knees club foot


Hind Limbs (20 points)
Evaluators appraise the hind feet, hind legs, hocks, gaskin and hip from the side and back at the walk, trot and standing.

Horses may score 18, 19 or 20 for moving or standing particularly straight or for having exceptional bone, muscle or form to function.
Horses score 15, 16 or 17 for minor conformation faults which would not normally lead to unsoundness or limit performance.
Horses score 12, 13 or 14 for conformation faults that may not affect soundness but may limit performance.
Horses score 9, 10 or 11 for major conformation faults that affect soundness and performance (evaluator's opinion).
.
Minor Faults Major Faults
slightly ****-footed ****-footed
camped behind sickle-hocked
cow hocks post-legged
bandy-legged cow hocks
slightly sickle-hocked 
slightly post-legged 
lack of muscle 
toe out or in 
rope walking 
small feet

Head, Neck, Body and Balance (20 points)
Evaluators appraise head, neck, body and balance during movement and while standing. Balance is relative to body proportions.

Horses score 18, 19 or 20 for exceptional characteristics and balance.
Horses score 15, 16 or 17 for minor conformation faults or unsightliness (e.g. long head, roman nose, pig eyes, ewe neck, thick throatlatch, cresty, thick neck, short neck, improper angulation, long back, shallow girth, goose rump, high tail-set).
Horses score 12, 13 or 14 when conformation faults become more exaggerated thus limiting performance.
Horses score 9, 10 or 11 if, in the opinion of the evaluators, the horse has a combination of faults that would make the horse potentially unusable, being excessively out of proportion, downhill or over-reaching.
Athletic Movement (20 points)
Evaluators will appraise athletic movement at the trot. Athletic movement will be assessed using four components; length of stride, rhythm, lightness, and impulsion. Length of stride is the distance the horse moves while one foot (any foot) is off the ground. Rhythm refers to how well the movement of each foot is in balance and in time with each other foot. Lightness is a coordination of stride and rhythm so that movement appears to take minimum effort. Impulsion is the use of the hind quarters to provide momentum to the movement.

Horses scoring 18, 19, 20 would be noted as having a long stride with excellent rhythm, lightness, and impulsion.
Horses scoring 15, 16, 17 maybe slightly deficient in one or two categories but overall movement is good.
Horses scoring 12, 13, 14 would have at least one undesirable movement trait or be somewhat deficient in all categories.
Horses scoring 9, 10, 11 would have an excessively short, choppy stride lacking rhythm, be heavy movers with no impulsion.
Type (20 points)
Evaluators appraise type on the basis of overall eye appeal characteristics and breed standards while standing.

Horses score 18, 19 or 20 for refinement, presence, fitness, ideal size and athletic appearance.
Horses score 15, 16 or 17 for lack of refinement, fitness and type.
Horses score 12, 13 or 14 for coarseness, a poor eye or poor turnout or for being too large or too small and off type, etc.
Evaluators may score type at 9, 10 or 11 if, in their opinion, it has no useful athletic function.


----------



## Smilie (Oct 4, 2010)

(sorry, minior and major faults did not paste correctly, far as columns, so will need to look up the actual site


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

Ok so here is how this will go. i will not disclose the age or breed of the horses im posting. for thoughs of you who know this info pretend you dont.

(excuse the less the ideal confo shots. the horses dont cooperate well when im by myself)

Horse #1





























Horse # 2 (who cant square up or stay off a hill to save her life)





































Horse # 3

























































As i said judge them as it you know nothing about them but what is in their pics. no breed or age. will reveal that later.


----------



## Zexious (Aug 2, 2013)

^Just curious, aren't breed and age relevant knowledge when trying to critique a horse?


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

Yes but when i state the age some poeple wont do it. And it more of a gues the breed with two anyway.


----------



## Saranda (Apr 14, 2011)

Here's my boy, have fun.  He's a 10yo Latvian Carriage horse, a light draft, if I may. Sorry for the less than ideal confo shots - it was raining heavily and I didn't feel up to posing him for a full set.


----------



## Zexious (Aug 2, 2013)

^Ugh, he's so handsome /swoon
Looking forward to op's thoughts!


----------



## Smilie (Oct 4, 2010)

Zexious said:


> ^Just curious, aren't breed and age relevant knowledge when trying to critique a horse?



Yes
Stock horses are given until age two, a no fault for being built downhill, as they are still in a growth age
Far as breed, when they are judged in mixed classes at open shows, correct conformation and travel is universal, BUT the judge should also then be able to judge each horse as to type, thus breed standard


----------



## Smilie (Oct 4, 2010)

It is difficult to judge a horse, when it is just a picture, no in person, and almost impossible without them standing up correctly, esp when you can't also see them move.
I will post a few of horses I have shown, to give an idea of how they should stand, in order to make any informed opinion.

yearling filly



Mature mare (Charlie)



Yearling gelding (Charlie's son )



Charlie travelling (hunter in hand mares )


----------



## Zexious (Aug 2, 2013)

^Right, that's what I thought.
That's why I was surprised when Kiger posted the three horses without that information. I thought critiquing confo and guessing breed were two pretty different things. 

Gorgeous horses, by the way. <3


----------



## Saranda (Apr 14, 2011)

Thank you, Zexious.  He's not without flaws, but he is and will be the best for me. And he sure knows that!


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

some are "older" and sometimes when i say the age of one people wont judge him lol. all are over 9 years old. the roan is a Apache reservation mustang/pony, the pinto is a grade ranch horse and no idea what the black one is. 

that better?

Edit by guess the breed that was because we dont know. one is half stock horse and who knows what his dam was. some people think he is a saddle bred cross others say something elce. hence why i was going to leave it up to the op. i show open shows so breed "stranded" is sometimes up to the judge to guess the breed.


----------



## HSEventing (Jun 11, 2016)

Can you Critique my horse for me please?
http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q486/hseventing/IMG_3855_zpsawpr7e8n.jpg
http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q486/hseventing/IMG_3858_zpsqli4fiud.jpg
this is the best back leg photo i could get
http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q486/hseventing/IMG_3864_zpsvpcgja1f.jpg


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

Okay, so here goes. Wish me luck, lol.


I'll start with Kiger's horses (btw I do know the pinto )


*Horse #1*


(I hope I'm assuming right that she's a mare)


She's fairly well balanced (as far as height), though if the pictures serve well enough she looks a little bit uphill to me. Then again, in the pic from the back she loos like she could be downhill, so I'm not sure. I think the angle is a little off in that one, so I'll go with my original thought.


Her neck looks like it ties in a little too low. She has a little bit of a long back but her underline looks like it's longer than her topline, which based on what everyone has said is a good thing. She has a clean throatlatch but to me her neck looks a little too thin for as long as it is. With that said, it looks like it ties in fairly well. I think that's personal preference as far as thickness, as she seems like she'd be able to move fairly well without that being a problem.


Her shoulders may be a bit too muscled in relation to her hindquarters. I don't know what she does though, so that may be good for her use. I like her head, it looks pretty evenly sized and proportioned. 


It looks like she stands all four of her legs pretty well under herself, except for maybe being a little bit camped out. I don't see any major issues with her legs. Her hindquarters also look pretty nice, Based on the picture from the back her hips looks off balance, but I'm pretty sure that's just because she has one let further forward.




*Horse #2*


Her hindquarters look really well balanced. Since in all the pics except for the one from the back her hind legs are splayed or stretched out, I can't tell a lot about them. 


I like the set of her tail and she doesn't look up or down hill to me. I definitely like the distribution of her muscle too. Her legs also looks thicker than the bay's, which to me makes her a little more versatile because she could stand a little more strain. 


Her front legs looks nice; everything lines up on both legs. The angle of her fetlocks to the ground is also good looking to me; not too steep or too shallow. If I'm thinking right her shoulder is a little too steep toward her withers. Then again it may be because of the way she's holding her neck. This pic shows what I mean:










The only thing I'm not a fan of is the neck, just like on the first horse. I'm just not liking how long it is, and I feel like it's longer than the other mare. It also ties in better though, and overall I think she's better balanced.




*Horse #3*


He's the one I probably like the best of the three overall in build. 


His left hind looks like it turns in a tiny bit, but I think it's the angle of the photo. If not he might be slightly sickle hocked, but I don't think he is. He also looks to be a tad uphill, especially in this one:










He's got a shorter and (IMO) sturdier looking neck. It's not overly thick but it doesn't look stretched out either. It also ties in very nicely. He also looks to have a very nicely proportioned head.


I like the way he stands. He's not too under himself or camped out. His hindquarters look nicely balanced and rounded. The angle of his shoulder looks good, and so does his hip. He's also got the slightly thicker legs I like. Is it just the picture, or is left front knee slightly higher than his right front?


Other than uphill the only fault I really see is that his topline and underline appear to be almost the same length. 






They all look really nice though. Let me know what I missed/added and I'll be glad to get feedback. Thanks again Kiger!!


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

Now Saranda's


I don't see any uphill or downhill on him, which looks really nice. He's very study looking and his legs look nicely proportioned to his body. The only thing I see there is that the fetlocks of his back hooves angle a little too steeply to the ground IMO. His cannons also look like the might be a little bit too long, but I'm not sure about that one. 


His head my be a tad long but I think that's just the pictures, it looks pretty well proportioned in the second pic. I like the way his neck ties in and it is proportioned nicely to his shoulder. 


I like his back length, and it looks good in relation to his underline. (trying to pay attention to that, as you can see).


Do you guys think he has an upright shoulder? (I'm trying to figure out what that is exactly). Either way I like the way he stands under himself. 




That's all I've got for him. I can't think of anything else to comment on.


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

Good! and odie is way uphill lol! posting on him sucks because i hit myself and its not fun. the first horse is a gelding and old as dirt lol! we are guessing tb? honestly have no clue. and the roan (mare) is old as well. 

I think you where spot on! I think notty (roan) is a bit down hill myself but over all has been a good speed horse in her day. then again so what the black (fadded to bayish). the black one is actualy the one who is going blind in one eye. i will try to dig up better pics. hard when they want to eat or stare at you. or they find a hill lol!


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

KigerQueen said:


> Good! and odie is way uphill lol! posting on him sucks because i hit myself and its not fun. the first horse is a gelding and old as dirt lol! we are guessing tb? honestly have no clue. and the roan (mare) is old as well.
> 
> I think you where spot on! I think notty (roan) is a bit down hill myself but over all has been a good speed horse in her day. then again so what the black (fadded to bayish). the black one is actualy the one who is going blind in one eye. i will try to dig up better pics. hard when they want to eat or stare at you. or they find a hill lol!



Thanks! I'm glad I didn't mess it up. I felt like I was seeing stuff that wasn't there, but I decided to go with my gut. Guess it paid off. 


Oh, I think the fading is why I didn't realize who he was! I love Rocket, my bad.  I don't remember, how old (about) is he? The roan mare is cute, but I can't get past Odie. I just have a thing for paints, lol.


I can see posting on an uphill horse not being fun. The closest I've gotten to that is sitting a trot bareback on a bony mare. (Won't do that again). I don't see (Notty?) as being downhill, but maybe I just miss it since I don't see her in person.


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

yeah rocket is 31 XD! i have tried to have confo critiques on him but as soon as i say his age people wont do it XD! The mare (Not Yet aka Notty) is about 26-27 so both oldies XD! 

I have special shoes on odie that are a bit thick (synthetic) and he only has enough hoof wall for normal metal on the backs for now. that means his front end is lifted up even MORE! ****!

Il also be posting vids on both oldies on odie journal tonight if you wanna poke on by.


----------



## ApuetsoT (Aug 22, 2014)

I've got a pretty good picture you can try out on. I could also post a WB for you for a different body type of horse.

3yr Appendix


----------



## Saranda (Apr 14, 2011)

Thanks for taking a shot at critiquing Snicks.  

As far as I understand, he is downhill after all - if you imagine a straight line from the highest point of his hip to the highest point of shoulder, it really does show. He is proportionate, his legs are clean and he's overall a sturdy horse, however you're right that his hind fetlocks and cannon bones are quite steep/long, as well as his shoulder is quite upright. These factors combined, it's not too easy for him to put his weight on his hind legs and to collect, so he wouldn't excel at dressage or jumping, however he's a good working/driving horse and he's great for my needs as a pleasure/trail rider. But we've been working hard on basic dressage/schooling, so he's getting better at using his hind end, which is really important for his longevity in long term. 

It would be interesting to see what experienced conformation critics have to say about him judging these pictures.



BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 said:


> Now Saranda's
> 
> 
> I don't see any uphill or downhill on him, which looks really nice. He's very study looking and his legs look nicely proportioned to his body. The only thing I see there is that the fetlocks of his back hooves angle a little too steeply to the ground IMO. His cannons also look like the might be a little bit too long, but I'm not sure about that one.
> ...


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

ApuetsoT said:


> I've got a pretty good picture you can try out on. I could also post a WB for you for a different body type of horse.
> 
> 3yr Appendix


Sorry for the late response!

Personally I don't like how short his back is, because it makes him look "squished (?)" That could be the angle of the picture though.

His underline is relatively long, so that's good. His hocks and cannons look very long as steep to me. He looks a tiny bit butt high but nothing major.

I like his neck and head, they're very pretty. His shoulder is a little too small to me (I don't know what the proper term would be). What I mean by that is the distance from his armpit (if you will) to the front of his chest looks too short.

His hindquarters are a little too sharply angled toward his tail. Also, does he stand under himself in front or is that just me? His fronts just seem a little too steeply angled toward the back. 

Overall a cute little horse, but the short back and squished look (probably from the angle of the shot) throw me off a bit.


----------



## ApuetsoT (Aug 22, 2014)

I've had him critiqued several times so I'll let you know what other have said.

His shoulder it a bit too upright, not horrible but if it was laid back more it would improve his jump(He already jumps like a maniac though). Everyone likes his neck and tie-in. He is leaning forward in that photo, so he isn't actually that camped under in front. Pasterns are a bit upright, but not bad. He doesn't stand still. His back is short, but not debilitatingly. Everyone who's looked at him likes his hip and hock set, though it had been said he could do with a bit more bone.

He might look squished to you because he literally is just a mini TB. He's max 15.1 and super narrow and slightly built. Anything more than 5'3"/4" and 130lbs is too big for him.


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

He sounds like he works well for you, but tbph I'm not a big fan. If his back was a bit longer I think he'd be a very great looking horse. I see the upright pasterns if that means his front legs are too straight and upright (wasn't sure the terminology for that).

A friend of mine owns 3 TBs (one OTTB), and one of the things I've always liked about them is the longer back and sleek build. I like that they're long but not weak backed, because they move so nicely. Just for my own curiosity, how freely and smoothly does he move?

IMO he seems like one of those horses that doesn't ever look as good in photos as he does in real life. Most of the time my boy is that way. Gorgeous in person but looks pretty odd in most pictures I've taken of him.


----------



## ApuetsoT (Aug 22, 2014)

Long backs are a lot more flexible and have more mobility, that's why they like longer backs in dressage horses. He's my jumper so I'm looking for the sit and explosion, which a short back is good for. He is a pretty smooth ride, not much lift to his trot and the canter is easy to sit. Very conservative mover. Good hunter. But he also is very flexible and soft in the back, probably because he's not very muscle bound like lots of other short backed horses.

Is really is hard to get a good photo of, this is the best I've ever gotten of him.

Do you want a Warmblood to try out? He's got a very different build and a few extras.


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

Oh okay. That makes more sense now. I can see how some shorter horses can be a little too muscular, now that I think about the short backed QH I know. What's his name?

Yeah, the best picture I've ever gotten of my APHA gelding was with me laying on him, lol. We dont' do any serious riding, just hang around for fun, so that day we were chilling out. He's got a pretty average length back I think, if not a tad longer than average.

Sure, I'd love to try with the WB. Just for my own curiosity, would you mind putting his breed when you post him?


----------



## ApuetsoT (Aug 22, 2014)

4yr old Canadian Warmblood, but that doesn't tell you much. Top side is Selle Francais, Hanovarian and Holsteiner with a bit of KPWN for the rest.


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

I just realized that the other horse looked squished because of my computer! Now he looks fine (back length). Whoops.







Now to the warmblood.



He doesn't look particularly uphill or downhill. Maybe a tiny bit uphillhill if anything. His hindquarters are a little sharper than I like, and don't "roll" back into his rear legs. Speaking of which, he looks a little camped out in the back His neck looks a little too long, but it ties in well. He also has a clean throatlatch. He's pretty evenly muscled and while his hocks my be a little steep, he looks good overall. 

He has a long back, but now overly long or weak looking. I like the way he looks there. The only other thing I'd say is that his front legs seem a little odd, but I can't pinpoint exactly why. Maybe they're too straight?




Overall though, he's a pretty horse. Thanks for sharing, and let me know what I got wrong!


----------



## ApuetsoT (Aug 22, 2014)

BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 said:


> I just realized that the other horse looked squished because of my computer! Now he looks fine (back length). Whoops.


Oh, that would explain it. I didn't think he was that bad.






> Now to the warmblood.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He is uphill. He was only 4 in that picture(he's 6 now) so he was still growing. That's also where his 'pointy butt' comes from. He wasn't undersaddle at this point so little muscle development.

Longer back and weaker loin. Smaller, but decent hind end. Not really camped out. Hocks are a touch straight, I'm not sure what you mean by 'steep'. Good shoulder. Neck and throatlatch are clean.

You pinpointed his pasterns, good. That's his #1 issue. He has contracted SDFT. He is very upright. His left front at times has no angle to his fetlocks.

Here is a (terrible quality) recent picture as a 6yr old. You can see the difference in how he looks. Under muscled vs conformation. You also get another look at his scary pasterns.


----------



## senecawoman (Jun 27, 2016)

What? I see a beautiful majestic horse! Is this horse registered? If not this horse is perfect! It he is registered, you can always find faults. But I see a beautiful pinto horse!


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

You're right he isn't bad. On my other screen he looked about half that length in the back. Sorry.


By steep I meant there's not as much of an angle as their should be in them. Straight is a better term though, meant the same thing. 


Yeah in the newer picture he doesn't look camped out at all, It must have been the way he was standing. The uphill is more obvious in the newer picture to me. It was barely noticeable in the first one. I definitely liked his shoulder, and the neck also looks better in this pic, as do his hindquarters.


His pasterns are definitely a little scary, but he looks good overall.


----------

