# OK Here is a Horse on a "grid" for conformational analysis.



## ZaneyZanne123 (Nov 9, 2013)

I hope this works. Here is an example of the "grid" I use to do conformational analysis. It is based on variations from conformational experts. It is based on a standard ideal balanced horse measurements that follow for all basic equine builds. Each horse has his own characteristics (specified for its particular breed) but should still fall with in a basic balanced frame. IT shows the horse's weak points and strong points with out having to visually guess. Each horse depending on its particular usage/form will vary a little. Just because its not within the ideal range does not render the horse useless or mean the animal is poorly conformed, there is not one horse on this planet that is perfect to ideal. Remember ideal is based on human perception and mechanics of movement (physics also) based on body skeletal form. The goal is to be as close to ideal as one can get following the breeds characteristics. In other words it should still fall into a balanced form. (most of conformation is skeletal form and how the muscles and etc. attach to such) 

The picture shown is an older picture and does show a couple of inaccuracies, I was still learning how to use this grid form. I will point those out. (this photo was given to me by permission of the owner.) THis is a Fresian/Arab adult horse.










Each line has a specific colour I use for certain readings. In this photo I use red to show angles, blue to show straightness. Orange for level of legs, grey for level of body and yellow for the head and neck, green to show level of croup and black for division of the body. Now I do things a bit more different because I have gained more knowledge and find that other lines are useful and have also chosen green dots to show how the head and neck attachment sites and purple to show the location of the horse's center of gravity while standing. I now also show the line to where the ideal hind leg should be in correlation to the hind quarters. 

THe Grey line showing the levelness of the body (down hill verses up hill build) is off in this photo. This horse when up on a new grid and done with the proper set line shows to be more level built. The orange lines showing correlation between the level of the hock and the knees the top orange line is a little to low. It shows that the hock sits a tad high. When put on a new grid the hock sits just right. The red line showing the angle wence the humerus lies is a little off as well. The elbow sits a bit lower than indicated and thus the humerus is not as flat at the current line shows. I have not calculated the angles in numbers between the shoulder and humerus so its not shown either. 

Some might question why I do not show the length of the neck on the crest line and put the line going down the center of the neck. Based on skeletal structure the neck does not necessarily end right at the withers. The neck ends at the last cervical vertebrae. This can vary a little from animal to animal meaning the neck skeletally can end considerably before the withers begin. Many ppl use the nutchal ligament and or crest line on top of the neck as indication of the necks length. This is not necessarily wrong but not exactly accurate either. If one measures the neck from the poll to the withers its not going to be that far off to screw things up. I just choose to use the other way of measurement following the cervical line instead. Neither way is considered wrong.

Ok, This horse is built quite lovely really. I believe he was used as a Dressage animal primarily. I do not show the balance box in this photo. I usualy take it off after I do because then there are just to many lines to contend with and things begin to look confusing and jumbled up, nor do I keep the lines to show where the center of gravity sits. To many lines makes my brain hurt so I do those first then eliminate them afterwards.
This horse's head and neck blend VERY nicely. The throat latch is clean with a nice curve to it and the poll also has a nice curve to it. It leaves plenty of room for the head to flex with out opposition. I don't show the angle to it but trust me its darn good. The neck is nicely formed and well defined. It could stand to be a hair bit more "cut out" underneath but who can complain with that? IT blends into the shoulders quite well. It comes out above the point of shoulder and smoothly out of the withers. IT is wider at the bottom and at the top. IT actually falls within the proper length but any shorter and it would be fall out of it. The eyes are well set on the head and the jaw is well defined. Lovely head on that horse.

The shoulder is long and stis at a very good angle. I did not measure the angle but I will guess at about 48 degrees. The humerus is semi long but even with my new lines put in it still sits a bit flat. This horse will not have the ground eating stride in front because the flatness of the humerus bone. However the angle of the shoulder will greatly accommodate for this. His front leg is almost perfectly straight. I don't have a line showing how the legs sit under the body (point of elbow straight up through the withers.) Ideally the point of elbow should sit in front of the withers. I don't see any major issue in that with this horse either. They sit perhaps a tad behind but I'm not complaining. I'd kill for straight legs like that on a horse. The knees are large, flat and with out blemish. The cannons are short (not to short) flat and with adequate bone. The pasterns are of average length but the hoof axis is a little off as you can see with the red angle indicator. By visual inspection I thought the pasterns were weak looking but with the line showing angle it does sit parallel to the shoulder angle and its the hoof axis that is off thus changing its angle some.

The horse is broken into thirds and each third should equal one another. This horse shows he is a hair long in the loins. However the loins are well muscled and don't fall to far out of the ideal realm. I don't have a line showing the width between the two. The rear end is of adequate size and there is a good equilateral triangle showing the angles between the pelvis, the femur and the stifle. The distance between the point of hip and the stifle is excellent. (nice and wide) and has good muscle attachment points and thus some power. This horse should also have good jumping power. The angle of the triangle between the above mentioned points should give the horse and image of being square. This horse falls a little out of it and the "square" look of the hind quarters can vary from breed to breed in what is acceptable. I usually use that in analyzing certain breeds or disciplines. Dressage you want square but in a TWH not so much because of their way of going. But it all should still be relative. This horse's stifle is a hair high but its not closed or tight, it should not pose a big problem with under body impulsion and reach. HIs gaskin is a little short but if it was any longer it would distort the entire hind leg. Some things just work even if they do fall out of the ideal or norm. Again this horse wont have the ground eating stride but should be adequate enough to get the job done well with finesse. It will take him more strides to complete a line that it would for say a big Warmblood with long legs. Those hinds legs are well set and are pretty darn straight also. Who can complain on that. The hocks sit well and have an excellent angle to them. Not exceptionally large but they are adequate enough. They look to be blemish free. The croup is a bit steep but not so far to hinder hinds. I would like to see a little flatter in this horse. He has an average tail carriage. Tail carriage and croup are not the same thing. One can have a high tail carriage with a steep croup angle. I see this a lot in the THW groups and in QH groups. 

Over all a Lovely well built animal. What a great outcome with the two breed combinations. One can pay a mint for a well built horse like this one. I was told by the owner the horse has a great temperament and work ethic. I'd hold on to that horse.

With out writing a book's worth and going into much detail that is a general breakdown of what I like to do with conformational analysis. I am still learning and I put into use my new knowledge every time I can.

This is also a good conformational picture.


----------



## Elana (Jan 28, 2011)

I like your grid analysis, but without it my first impression would be a good horse but lacking reach in front due to a low point of shoulder and shallow angle to the humerus (not bad but limiting). This will limit his stride in dressage but will also limit his scope in front over fences. Power behind is not of much use if the front won't fold and knees cannot come up. His croup is rounded and a bit steep (which carries through the hind leg). 

I look at level a little differently than you do with your grid. I go from the root of the neck to the point of buttock and that line tells me level or not (root of the neck is just above the aqua dot you have placed at the base of neck). I then look at the height of the stifle against the height of the elbow and the height of the hocks against the height of the knees. A horse can be built level (root of neck to point of buttock) but work down hill if the stifles and hocks are MUCH higher than his elbows/knees. 

This is a nice horse but I think his conformation may limit him. Of course, out on a course he might have the drive to prove us all wrong. I never forget that. 

I rarely grid out a horse anymore. Years of looking you know? Sometimes I draw a little and put it up here for illustration purposes. 

I have noted over the years a greater propensity for sickle hocked horses or over straight behind.. or both. 45 years ago the slightly straighter hind leg was being touted as "preferred" by conformation analysts. This seems to have been taken to an extreme (look at a halter Quarterhorse). I never subscribed to this.. a hind leg is a spiral and needs proper and enough angulation to propel a horse properly. 

As you note he is long in the loins (which I call the coupling). In fact, he is a bit rough coupled which tells me with his good flesh there has been some strain there. His entire rear end could stand to be moved forward about 3 inches. I find his hind leg straight through the hock (which is large and well formed) and his stifle a bit far back.


----------



## Halcyon (May 25, 2014)

can you please put my guy on the grid? I posted his photo in the other thread you were so kind as to post on (OTTB Critique) The better photo is on the 2nd or 3rd page.


----------



## Corporal (Jul 29, 2010)

I find this grid fascinating. Thanks for sharing. But...I agree with Elana about the back legs. Her quote is so well put. A straight back leg works well enough for a dog bc a working dog doesn't bear additional weight and has no need to pull the back legs underneath to support more weight than his/her own. But a riding horse needs to do this in order to do his job well.


Elana said:


> A horse can be built level (root of neck to point of buttock) but work down hill if the stifles and hocks are MUCH higher than his elbows/knees.
> 
> This is a nice horse but I think his conformation may limit him. Of course, out on a course he might have the drive to prove us all wrong. I never forget that.
> 
> I have noted over the years a greater propensity for sickle hocked horses or over straight behind.. or both. 45 years ago the slightly straighter hind leg was being touted as "preferred" by conformation analysts. This seems to have been taken to an extreme (look at a halter Quarterhorse). I never subscribed to this.. *a hind leg is a spiral and needs proper and enough angulation to propel a horse properly. *


I am trying to train my eye to good conformation, and I am happy to hear of multiple ways to do so. =D


----------



## GotaDunQH (Feb 13, 2011)

Elana said:


> I like your grid analysis, but without it my first impression would be a good horse but lacking reach in front due to a low point of shoulder and shallow angle to the humerus (not bad but limiting). This will limit his stride in dressage but will also limit his scope in front over fences. Power behind is not of much use if the front won't fold and knees cannot come up. His croup is rounded and a bit steep (which carries through the hind leg).
> 
> I look at level a little differently than you do with your grid. I go from the root of the neck to the point of buttock and that line tells me level or not (root of the neck is just above the aqua dot you have placed at the base of neck). I then look at the height of the stifle against the height of the elbow and the height of the hocks against the height of the knees. A horse can be built level (root of neck to point of buttock) but work down hill if the stifles and hocks are MUCH higher than his elbows/knees.
> 
> ...


Like this post and I agree. I don't do grids either. What I find in this horse in addition to what you said, is that he's carrying more upfront as compared to his backend. He's look front heavy, so IMO...I would not say his 3rds are balanced.

ETA: Now, if the shot was taken as all confo shots should be....dead center of the barrel, he might look more balanced. But this shot was taken forward near the horse's front legs.


----------



## ZaneyZanne123 (Nov 9, 2013)

Elana said:


> I like your grid analysis, *but without it my first impression would be a good horse but lacking reach in front due to a low point of shoulder and shallow angle to the humerus (not bad but limiting).* I have not measured the degree of angle nor the degree of the humerus' angle and the angle there in. The ideal is about 110 degress this horse might just prove to be off. I can go back and see. However th point of shoulder is not that low at all. It falls pretty much inbetween the stifle and the point of thigh (not buttock but thigh where the femur comes out of the pelvis). It might show to be a hair low but not enough to be a huge issue. This will limit his stride in dressage but will also limit his scope in front over fences. *Power behind is not of much use if the front won't fold and knees cannot come up. His croup is rounded and a bit steep (which carries through the hind leg). *True indeed.
> 
> I look at level a little differently than you do with your grid. I go from the root of the neck to the point of buttock and that line tells me level or not (root of the neck is just above the aqua dot you have placed at the base of neck). *I then look at the height of the stifle against the height of the elbow and the* *height of the hocks against the height of the knees*. A horse can be built level (root of neck to point of buttock) but work down hill if the stifles and hocks are MUCH higher than his elbows/knees.
> This is acceptable. This is how I used to look at it but after speding so much time in reasearch and with a Conformation specialist I changed this to just a little above the knee (the top orange line) and the bottom line to just below the knee. (like i have stated theses lines are not accurate in this photo) The point of hock should measure level with the top of the knee (the larger the knee the larger the hock......ideally) line ideally. Some ppl use the level of the chestnut to measure the hight of the hock (at its point) But the chestnuts height vary so much in horses that this is not a reliable point to use. Occasionaly some horses dont even have chestnuts. His stifle is a litlte high but it is not tight. Now if it was tight in conjunction with being high this would further limit his under reach.
> ...


I do have another picture that I wanted to put up (ran out of time) to show a horse that is pretty well conformationaly not well at all for comparison measures. Talk about rough coupling.....I hope to add it later on.


----------



## Elana (Jan 28, 2011)

No horse is perfect. Some very imperfect horses excel at things mostly because they desire to and not because they should be able to (John Henry, Exterminator, Seabiscuit). I recall a little mare (and I do mean small) back in the late 1960's who competed (for the US I believe) in International Grand Prix Jumping. She jumped clean by tucking and twisting the hind legs over a fence and being very very tight with her front legs. 

Then there are horses that are very well conformed but who never do a darn thing because they lack the "heart" or the Mind to do things. 

I find conformation interesting because of the physics involved. That said, I prefer a horse like this one, who is balanced over all. He is limited but looks a good ride. 

I also do not expect hocks and knees to be the same height. That would be 'weird' and not work well. 

The other thing is.. I have been looking at horses since I was 3 years old.. and drawing them since then. You develop an eye over 55 years of looking. 

And I never pass a horse without looking. 

Funny story. When I was 14 my sister was looking at buying a second horse. We went to a dealer and she has a small horse we tried that was a good enough horse but really a pony. She also had a nice-ish buckskin that was "getting over shipping fever" and was not in good flesh. So.. we looked at these horses but I turned and way out in the field was this black horse. Clearly head and shoulders above all the others.. and I said, "What about that horse?" The dealer turned to my sister and said, "She has a good eye. That horse is my show horse and is not for sale." 

We ended up buying a 3 year old appaloosa mare.. very down hill build with mutton withers and good front end construction (shoulder etc.) but limited due mostly to the very downhill thing. She was my first training project. I made her into a field hunter. She was very Thoroughbred or refined QH in build.. but the best field hunter you could ever ask for. Brave over fences and knew what "gone away" meant. Never would have thought it looking at her conformation.


----------



## GotaDunQH (Feb 13, 2011)

^see, I look for a horse with hocks and knees that line up pretty well. If the horse is high hocked, the performance will be affected for my discipline...and it will harder for that horse to get a nice swing and drive underneath....with the hock not trailing out the back.


----------



## Inga (Sep 11, 2012)

So very true about "a horse having heart" Elana. My friend had a Quarter Horse that was so ugly. Poor thing had so many conformation faults but that horse would do ANYTHING for my friend or anyone for that matter. Great personality, drive and just a "I can do it" attitude. That horse beat out some really well put together horses in the ring (not in halter, obviously) 

I wouldn't buy a horse that had a bunch of glaring faults but at the end of the day what is INSIDE the horse is just as important if not more then what is outside. Same goes for people really.


----------



## GotaDunQH (Feb 13, 2011)

A friend of mine owns a Morab gelding...low backed, **** footed and over at the knee...far from the best legs. But boy was he good minded. He was the most flexible little horse I've ever seen. He came to the barn at the age of 6 and is now in his late 20's. He could be a little spooky but never bolted...he would just look at something and goes sideways. He packed around more beginners in lessons, so much try, happy go lucky guy.


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

I find the grid topic interesting but I'm not sure how much of a need there is for it.

I can pretty much look at a horse and point out what I like and what I dislike (what I perceive as strengths and weaknesses in a horse). That seems pretty accurate for me. But I am also an artist and used to looking at horses both in the flesh, on paper, in sculpture, etc. 

I guess I don't see the need for the grid unless you really have some sort of specific proportions you are looking for. Maybe for top racing prospects for example. But then that the top prospect may turn out to be a lesser horse than the one with a flaw or two. 

But I think most horsemen can probably eyeball a horse pretty good depending on what you are using the horse for. Some traits are universal. (Things that effect soundness and overall strength). But some traits are more important depending on what you plan to do with the horse. For example, someone looking at using a horse for dressage may care about the lift and extension of the legs to give the horse a more lofty gait. But as someone who trail rides I may not care about that as long as the horse is sound. Someone looking at a horse for a western discipline may be looking for a horse that is different from the dressage rider. And someone looking at a race horse may like certain things that as a trail rider I don't care for. Because the horse's uses are different.

I guess that's why different breeds were developed. Not all traits are equally important depending on the horse's use.


----------



## Elana (Jan 28, 2011)

The grid is illustrative for those who are not conformation savvy. It takes years to be able to look at a horse and know what is good and what is not.. just from a look. 

I like the grid for that. 

OTOH if the photo is poor, the horse is angled to the camera "film" plane and so forth the grid won't tell the truth. 

We need to remember that photos are a 2-D rendition of a 3-D animal!


----------



## Corporal (Jul 29, 2010)

trailhorserider said:


> I can pretty much look at a horse and point out what I like and what I dislike (what I perceive as strengths and weaknesses in a horse). That seems pretty accurate for me. But I am also an artist and used to looking at horses both in the flesh, on paper, in sculpture, etc.


You have a well trained eye.


trailhorserider said:


> But I think most horsemen can probably eyeball a horse pretty good depending on what you are using the horse for. Some traits are universal.


I don't think that this is so, or else more buyers would reject badly built horses. Yes, some poorly built horses excel for reasons that have to do with temperment, good training and personal drive, but why buy an unproven, poorly built animal and expect them to be athletic? If you are buying your Vet an addition to their house every few years bc your horse needs that much medical attention you do NOT own an athlete.


trailhorserider said:


> I guess that's why different breeds were developed. Not all traits are equally important depending on the horse's use. :smile:


IMHO, if you examine the best of every breed, you won't see any big variations in their strong backs, well formed legs, shorter cannon bones, and well tied in necks.


----------



## ZaneyZanne123 (Nov 9, 2013)

Elana said:


> *No horse is perfect. Some very imperfect horses excel at things mostly because they desire to and not because they should be able to (John Henry, Exterminator, Seabiscuit). I recall a little mare (and I do mean small) back in the late 1960's who competed (for the US I believe) in International Grand Prix Jumping. She jumped clean by tucking and twisting the hind legs over a fence and being very very tight with her front legs.
> *
> Your 100% right and I have stated that time and time again.
> 
> ...


 Some will surprise you in ways you would have never thought. It goes back to that heart, desire to please and ability to over come their physical limitations


----------



## ZaneyZanne123 (Nov 9, 2013)

Here is a nice rear end picture. The grid or lines in this case show symmetry in the rear. Notice how the lines bisect the horse and its legs almost perfectly. This is what you want to see in the rear regardless of breed...symmetry .











This is pretty close to perfection with a very slight variation.


----------



## Elana (Jan 28, 2011)

I like the symmetry but the hind leg is a spiral and I would like a little more toe out and rotation.. although this horse will be fine as there appears to be enough "Umph" in the rear muscling. I like the straight drop from pin through the hock.. but I would also like the hock a little closer to the ground. 

If this horse were any straighter behind.. and his toes pointed any more straight ahead, he would be bowlegged. 

And this is where the grid sets up what what is correct.. but then we get into the nuances that are outside the grid. And trust me (the OP knows this) what I am saying here are nuances..


----------



## ZaneyZanne123 (Nov 9, 2013)

The feet are where you want them and this is pretty close to ideal. any deviation outwards or inwards would change this. (cow hock toe out to being toed in and or bow legged.) This is a way to discern what amount of deviation can occur and still be within the limits of functionality. No you don't want a perfectly straight toe in the rear. If the toe was inwards or straight you lose forward clearance and the stifle would be pinched (if the entire leg was rotated to make a perfectly straight forward toe in the rear.) One will lose freedom of the swing forward of the rear leg. The line dropped from the point of buttock to the ground bisects the heel of both hind feet pretty much down the center, however the toe or foot is slightly rotated to the outside which is normal. The left is slightly off. Now I am going to show a picture of a horse that his poor symmetry in the rear. 










This horse has something going on in the rear. The symmetry is not that great. (I have seen worse though.) The hocks do not line up with one another (one is lower than the other guided by the white line I drew in.) Now the horse is standing a little off in the rear (not square) but is not that far off to cause such a asymmetric line. In fact the entire right side of the rear is off. One can see this by the way the spine comes off the tail doc, it leans towards the right a little. The left side of the upper rump is also a little more higher than the right. The owner complained that the horse just did not travel right in either direction in the rear end. It could be that the animal's spine is out of symmetry in the rear thus throwing the entire rear end off including the leg settings. Or the horse was born with a deviation in the right leg ( perhaps being set to long and a plethora of other things.) The horse is a tad base wide. 

The asymmetry in this photo is subtle but its there. 

I have a good photo of a horse with hip down issue, when I get back up and running I will post that and show another asymmetry in the rear due to hip down issue. One will be able to discern a normal side vs. the abnormal side. It is not subtle and sticks out like a sore thumb but many ppl miss it.


----------



## ZaneyZanne123 (Nov 9, 2013)

OH here is another one I found.

This horse is a little base narrow (stand inside the line being dropped from the point of buttock to the ground) and is cow hocked (deviation inwards or rotation of the hock towards one another, this is also the cause of the toeing out in the rear also, more than what is normal.) Not severe but enough to be noticed.


----------



## ZaneyZanne123 (Nov 9, 2013)

who wants to ride the swan necked bus ????


----------

