# Paints vs. Pintos...



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

Your mare would be eligible to register as Pinto (PtHA-- a registry that has been around since the 1930's)-- Pinto is a "limited" color registry-- they do have a few restrictions as far as type and breeds (no draft, no appaloosa, no grade stallions-- stallions are not eligible to be registered unless they have both parents registered with Pinto or an approved breed registry.)

The American Paint Horse Association has been around since the 1960s, and before that there were two other similar associations started with similar purposes (they merged in the 60's to form APHA). APHA has always had the stock type colored horse as a focus, and early-on they limited bloodlines-- for a t least 3 decades now they have had no provision for registering any grade horses on color, but require all APHA horses to be from registered APHA, AQHA, or Thoroughbred bloodlines. More recently they further restricted their breeding so that all horses must have one APHA registered parent to be eligible for APHA registration.

So based on the above, I would consider the APHA Paint to be a limited-book breed-- they accept 2 other related breeds for crossing, so there will be similarities in type to those breeds in some bloodlines. 

PtHA Pinto I would consider a color registry limited to light/riding type horses and ponies from approved and/or known bloodlines. There is greater variety because they allow at least 19 approved breeds, and they do have divisions in their registry based on type.

Both registries also register solids from approved/registered parents, and allow them to show, but seperately from the fully registered horses that meet the color qualifications.

There are other paint/pinto registries out there, but the above two are by far the oldest, largest, and most widely recognized and "meaningful" (IMO) for paints/pintos.

There are many half-Arabian pintos dual-registered with PtHA, and their shows have show classes just for the Arab type-- its an option you might want to look into if there are PtHA shows in your area.

Cute mare BTW!


----------



## Mercedes (Jun 29, 2009)

People will claim upside, backwards, and forwards that Paints and QH's are the same. They no longer are the same. It would be like saying the Andalusian and Lusitano are the same. They also are not.

With the specialization of QH's for each of the western disciplines, the QH looks very different than the Paint in most cases...over and above the color factor. There also tend to be very distinct differences in temperament. 

You will of course find some individuals that resemble each other between the breeds depending on genetics, but shared blood several generations back is of no consequence and irrelevant. Only the first couple of generations matter.

I can see both the Arab and Paint traits in your mare and overall it's a good blend. She is not structured like a QH reiner, so it's no surprise she doesn't move like one.


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

*Mercedes* you are still just as wrong as the last time you tried to debate about the separation of Paints and QH's. The APHA allows outcrosses to QH's and TB's. Quarter Horses and Paints compete in the exact same events often with each other. Paints that rein look just like QH's that rein. QH's that race look like Paints that race. I challenge you to find a paint horse pedigree that doesn't have a QH in the first 3 generations. You will find very few that don't have a QH in the first or second generations. *In this case you are wrong don't compound it with repetition.*


----------



## DakotaLuv (Mar 21, 2009)

Ditto the above post.


----------



## Seahorseys (Nov 14, 2009)

So I guess I have to delve into her sire's lineage to find out for sure? There are no significant qualities that I can find that are exclusive to the paint breed. Only that they have a "similiar body type to a Quarterhorse" and of course, the color pattern. I spoke to the breeder and asked why she did this, if her intent was purposeful. She said it was to try to get a horse that had both endurance and strength, healthy but still somewhat delicate, as well as a more level-headed temperament. I will look into the PtHa. I don't even know what she would be well-suited for, and it's getting to be around the time that I need to choose a discipline, as we are currently doing the basics. I rode hunter/jumper for 10+ years, but considered dressage (my trainer's forte) By getting her breed strengths and weaknesses sorted out, I thought it might be easier to decide.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

Do you have her sire's and dam's registered names? if you could post them, we could research and have fun along with you, speculating what she might excell at based on ancestry.....

And yup, ditto Kevin's post--


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Another ditto what Kevin said.


----------



## PaintsPwn (Dec 29, 2009)

Cowboy doesn't have QH in the first three generations n___nb I'm pretty sure Tuff doesn't either, but he was just born last year so he doesn't count, but Cowboy's 9 now, so I guess he's an oddity in Kevin's world?


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

If "Tuff" is Scotch Times Tuffy, he is sired by a horse who is double registered APHA and AQHA.


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

PaintsPwn said:


> Cowboy doesn't have QH in the first three generations n___nb I'm pretty sure Tuff doesn't either, but he was just born last year so he doesn't count, but Cowboy's 9 now, so I guess he's an oddity in Kevin's world?


Post a copy of the papers and prove me wrong.


----------



## Seahorseys (Nov 14, 2009)

Eastowest said:


> Do you have her sire's and dam's registered names? if you could post them, we could research and have fun along with you, speculating what she might excell at based on ancestry.....


I would ABSOLUTELY love that! I don't have membership privileges as of yet.

Sire: Britches in a Twist #103393
Dam: Ayr Bint Reba #0538930 

Thanks so much!


----------



## GottaRide (Dec 10, 2007)

Mercedes said:


> People will claim upside, backwards, and forwards that Paints and QH's are the same. They no longer are the same. It would be like saying the Andalusian and Lusitano are the same. They also are not.
> 
> With the specialization of QH's for each of the western disciplines, the QH looks very different than the Paint in most cases...over and above the color factor. There also tend to be very distinct differences in temperament.


Riddle me this then, if a QH and a Paint horse are so different in looks, temperament and discipline, then what do you call a double registered AQHA/APHA horse?

Which one is a Paint horse and which one is a QH....
www.ragingimpulse.com
www.bigchextocash.com 
www.ironstarman.com 
Rocking WC Ranch ~ Home of AQHA/APHA Stallion The Will To Do
Cross Creek Farm Tuf
Spooks Gotta Gun : AQHA-APHA Bay Overo Stallion


----------



## Mercedes (Jun 29, 2009)

GottaRide said:


> Riddle me this then, if a QH and a Paint horse are so different in looks, temperament and discipline, then what do you call a double registered AQHA/APHA horse?


What kind of an argument is that? Just because people cross them doesn't mean they are the same.


----------



## Mercedes (Jun 29, 2009)

Eastowest said:


> If "Tuff" is Scotch Times Tuffy, he is sired by a horse who is double registered APHA and AQHA.


So what? They allow non-warmbloods into warmblood registries. Doesn't make the horse 'the same'.


----------



## Mercedes (Jun 29, 2009)

kevinshorses said:


> The APHA allows outcrosses to QH's and TB's.


EXACTLY! Allowing other breeds into a registry allows changes within the breed to occur. 



> Quarter Horses and Paints compete in the exact same events often with each other.


Only if they aren't specifically APHA or AQHA or specfied in some other manner. If it's an AQHA event, there aren't any 'Paints' in it unless the AQHA has allowed said Paint to be registered with them. 

It's irrelevant what criteria allow the horses to be cross-registered. Both Lusitanos and Andalusians can be registered in some of the same registries, doesn't make them the same horse.



> I challenge you to find a paint horse pedigree that doesn't have a QH in the first 3 generations. You will find very few that don't have a QH in the first or second generations.


That'll depend on breeders programs and who's breeding true to type and who's trying to get individuals capable of being double registered to increase their value. There certainly are alot of QH's that don't have Paints in them for breeders who want to compete in AQHA only...too risky if they get color, even from a breeding stock Paint.


----------



## PaintsPwn (Dec 29, 2009)

I honestly think they need to close the books. None of this AQHA and APHA cross registry bull. If we're going to do that, let's throw our hats in the air, and create a Stock Horse Association where as long as the horse it to 'type', let them compete against each other.


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

Mercedes In most of your posts you seem quite knowledgeable but this is one area where you are very underinformed. The AQHA will register anything that has two AQHA parents. It no longer matters how much white the horse has on it, therefore, there is no risk in breeding to double registered horses. Paint horses and QH share the same type of conformation and many of the same bloodlines. You can argue all you want but that is the fact. I'm sure in many areas you are well informed but this is not one of them. Paints compete with QH's on the race track and in reining and cutting with much success. Other breeds are allowed to compete in NRHA, NCHA and NRCHA events but they have little to no success because they lack the natural drive and athletisism that is inherent in the APHA and AQHA horses.


----------



## Seahorseys (Nov 14, 2009)

I can't understand this for the life of me, nor have I ever attempted to read one before. Here is her mom's pedigree. Now I have to dig up her dad's. Can anyone translate this for me? Or do any of the names look familiar? I ave spent far too much time learning about her lineage today, more than I have on my own family tree. I think I'm going to go play with her now, lol.


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

I've heard of Bask and Kemosabi so they must be pretty famous. I don't know much about arab bloodlines.


----------



## DakotaLuv (Mar 21, 2009)

Mercedes...you're totally wrong. Your posts just don't even make sense if you know about this subject. AQHA and APHA have the exact same breed standards and both derived from the same horses, one went toward color, one didn't.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

_>>>> People will claim upside, backwards, and forwards that Paints and QH's are the same. *They no longer are the same*. It would be like saying the Andalusian and Lusitano are the same. They also are not._

_>>>> With the specialization of QH's for each of the western disciplines, *the QH looks very different than the Paint in most cases*...over and above the color factor. There also tend to be very distinct differences in temperament. _


2006 World Champion AQHA Halter Stallion
















2006 World Champion APHA Halter Stallion
















2009 APHA World Champion Halter Stallion--------2009 AQHA World Champion Halter Stallion


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

_>>>> Can anyone translate this for me? Or do any of the names look familiar?_

Her sire performed in Western Pleasure. Her sire's damsire Ansata Halim Bey was a successful Arabian halter horse. 

Her dam's sire Cognac Perfection was a successful park (saddleseat English) and driving horse. her dam's damsire Khemosabi was legendary as a show horse and as a sire.


----------



## lacyloo (Jul 1, 2008)

PaintsPwn said:


> Cowboy doesn't have QH in the first three generations n___nb I'm pretty sure Tuff doesn't either, but he was just born last year so he doesn't count, but Cowboy's 9 now, so I guess he's an oddity in Kevin's world?


n___nb... Huh?????


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

WOW The difference in the conformation of those horses is incredible. You can hardly tell they are the same animal.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

Western Pleasure ROM and Superior earning Paint-- 









Western Pleasure ROM earner and World Qualifying Quarter Horse--


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

You must be using photoshop!! No way can that be a real paint. Why it looks just like the other horse.


----------



## PaintsPwn (Dec 29, 2009)

>



This horse visually sickens me. I believe it's Obsess to Impress.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

Its not Obsessed To Impress. Its Seriously Secure.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

AQHA World Champion, AQHA Congress Champion Hunter Under Saddle--









APHA World Champion, APHA Congress Champion Paint Hunter Under Saddle--


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

You obviously picked the only 8 horses that look alike in both breeds.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

_>>>> You obviously picked the only 8 horses that look alike in both breeds._ 

You notice it took me weeks and weeks to search em out and match em up too eh? :wink:


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

You msut keep people on staff to do this type of thing.


----------



## Seahorseys (Nov 14, 2009)

Thank you very much eastowest, for decoding the pedigree a bit for me. I didn't mean to start a debate or drag up an old argument. Just genuinely confused. I'll just call her half-Arab, half Quaint now, lol. Oh and I am also changing Seriously Secure's name to Seriously on Steroids, but in my OP, this is the build I see in alot of the QH's I board with, so you can see why I have a hard time believing she resembles anything like that.

Oh, and since you have been so helpful, will I be able to tell if she is of Polish, Crabbit...etc descent from looking at the pedigree?


----------



## Mercedes (Jun 29, 2009)

Eastowest said:


> _>>>> You obviously picked the only 8 horses that look alike in both breeds._
> 
> You notice it took me weeks and weeks to search em out and match em up too eh? :wink:


And none of these individuals possess both APHA and AQHA individuals in the first three generations?

It's also quite evident that horses competing in the same event should structurally lookalike to excel in said discipline at a high level regardless of breed. Otherwise, they wouldn't excel in that discipline.


----------



## Seahorseys (Nov 14, 2009)

I don't want to catch any flack for saying this, but I do notice a slight ALBEIT slight difference between the two breeds. Some paints have a tendency to look a little thinned out, possess some TB looking qualities or something. I may not know what I am talking about, but it stands out to me in some of the photos.


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

Mercedes said:


> It's also quite evident that horses competing in the same event should structurally lookalike to excel in said discipline at a high level regardless of breed. Otherwise, they wouldn't excel in that discipline.


 
Didn't someone write something almost exactly like this on the first page? You just argue to argue don't you? I think you know you're wrong youare just too stubborn to admit it. I guess that is one of the things that make this forum interesting.


----------



## Honeysuga (Sep 1, 2009)

AHH, another Mercedes vs.----- debate! Sorry I missed this one!

Common sense says: The 2 "breeds" started form the same horses and one branched for color... they are outcrossed to the same breeds and "incrossed" to each other as well and their registry is almost interchangeable, same conformation, same temperament, same jobs, why? They are the same thing!! One has "painted" coloring one does not and sometimes *gasp* the "painted" ones that are bred to the other "painted" ones come out looking just exactly like any other quarter horse... And why is that kiddies, shall we say it again? They are the same thing!

Op, your mare is beautiful and quite the "quaint" looking little girl lol. Keep us updated on your research!


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

_>>>> And none of these individuals possess both APHA and AQHA individuals in the first three generations?_

The AQHA horses don't have Paint ancestry unless it came from AQHA x AQHA cropouts.... And yes, the Paints have QH ancestry, as do most Paints, because QH crossing is allowed and practiced in the paint horse breed, as several of us have been saying .

_>>>> It's also quite evident that horses competing in the same event should structurally lookalike to excel in said discipline at a high level regardless of breed. Otherwise, they wouldn't excel in that discipline._ 

These Paints are winning at the top levels AT PAINT SHOWS. Thas where they won all the listed awards-- not at all-breed competitions against QHs. The QHs shown are winning at AQHA shows. Both breeds have the same standards at their shows for what a Halter or Pleasure or Hunter Under Saddle performer should look/move like, so in both breeds, horses have developed to meet their BREED's standards for those events.

_Seahorseys said--- _
_>>>> I don't want to catch any flack for saying this, but I do notice a slight ALBEIT slight difference between the two breeds. Some paints have a tendency to look a little thinned out, possess some TB looking qualities or something. I may not know what I am talking about, but it stands out to me in some of the photos. _

I agree that there are some individual differences, however to me the pictured 2006 winning Paint Halter horse is heavier muscled than the pictured 2006 winning QH Halter horse, and the pictured HUS QH looks more TB than the pictured Paint HUS horse, who to me has a slightly bigger hip, gaskin, and forearm... so I could argue seeing slightly more TB influence in the QHs in these two individual instances. I agree that the 2009 halter winning QH is heavier, and to me the WP horses are pretty close to tied. Structurally, angles wise, overall impression wise, the horses resemble each other quite a bit, and had I not been trying to match accomplishment to accomplishment and year to year, I could have hand picked horses that were built identically between the breeds, because there are so many to choose from that DO look even more alike-- I was just trying to be "fair", LOL.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

>>>>> Thank you very much eastowest, for decoding the pedigree a bit for me. I didn't mean to start a debate or drag up an old argument. Just genuinely confused. I'll just call her half-Arab, half Quaint now, lol. 

I like Quaint, LOL. But seriously, she could be properly called (and registered, if you like) a 1/2 Arab Pinto.... because she has a purebred Arab parent, and the Paint parent gave her pinto coloring (FWIW, in my area many registered Paints are also double registered Pintos-- pretty much all Paints can be Pintos, but not all Pintos can be Paints, because of the more limited bloodline requirements of the Paints.)

_>>>> Oh, and since you have been so helpful, will I be able to tell if she is of Polish, Crabbit...etc descent from looking at the pedigree? _

Her dam is not "straight" anything, but with her dam's sire Chymahrus Hallany being Al Khamsa, Straight Egyptian, she (your mare's dam) could be called "Egyptian related". As for the rest of the pedigree-- Cognac was pure Polish. Khemosabi was a blend of Crabbet, Polish, Babson Egyptian, etc. I would call your mare's Arab side an Egyptian related/American Arabian blend.


----------



## qtrhrsecrazy (Aug 2, 2009)

Seahorseys said:


> I can't understand this for the life of me, nor have I ever attempted to read one before. Here is her mom's pedigree. Now I have to dig up her dad's. Can anyone translate this for me? Or do any of the names look familiar? I ave spent far too much time learning about her lineage today, more than I have on my own family tree. I think I'm going to go play with her now, lol.


She has Ansata in there and it's my understanding, when it is close up anyway, they're very sought after


----------



## Mercedes (Jun 29, 2009)

I went to one of my sources, who I always go to if I want to know anything about QH's or need to talk to someone regarding Paints and she'll give me a contact. She's been extensively involved in the QH industry for a number years, is friends or acquaintances with most anyone who's anybody in the QH industry, has Paint connections, been involved in registries etc.. I asked her if the Paint and QH were the same breed.

I've asked her to join the site, but she is in the middle of a move halfway around the planet, so may not be able to accomodate that request...at least not for a month or two.

This is her e-mail back to me, verbatim:

No I would not consider them the same breed - it's a weird area - the paint horse association allows crop out quarter horses to be registered - however - I don't conisder them "paint horses" per se - they are QH with excess white - above the knee - extending over the eye - poll or lower lip and sometimes belly patches - alot of QH fell into this - Gunner being a high profile example - however he is in fact a crop out qh with QH bloodlines - paint horse blood is paint horse blood - same as a TB in a QH pedigree is still a TB - no matter what the papers say that horse is still that % TB.....a solid paint with paint blood is still a paint with no color not a QH -clear as mud eh?


The Pinto association is a color registry and I believe allows a far greater variety of blood - arab etc.,the APHA was founded on color and stock type conformation - both registries descended from spotted indian ponies

Paint coloring as we now know is genetic and the APHA is working to ensure that paint is bred to paint - I think much like the App assoc they are weeding out the Paint to QH breeding trend as there are enough in the gene pool to ensure both color and proven performance genetics - it is still however a smaller association and not nearly as big or as $$ driven as the QH industry - Solid paints are still ineligable to show anywhere but $$ driven associations(NCHA, NRHA etc) and still are worth virtually 0 in the marketplace.


Here is the link to the APHA - they have some really good info/history and genetic information but my personal opinion is no - they are not the same breed based on foundation/color/genetics and history
APHA.Com - The Breed


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

Mercedes said:


> No I would not consider them the same breed - it's a weird area - the paint horse association allows crop out quarter horses to be registered - however - I don't conisder them "paint horses" per se - they are QH with excess white - above the knee - extending over the eye - poll or lower lip and sometimes belly patches - alot of QH fell into this - Gunner being a high profile example - however he is in fact a crop out qh with QH bloodlines - paint horse blood is paint horse blood - same as a TB in a QH pedigree is still a TB - no matter what the papers say that horse is still that % TB.....a solid paint with paint blood is still a paint with no color not a QH -clear as mud eh?
> 
> 
> APHA.Com - The Breed


This ihas not been true for several years now. Any horse that has two QH parents can be registered as a QH regardless of the amount of white. If she does not know this then that brings her credentials into question. They are different breeds but they share far too many of the same bloodlines and characteristics to be considered completely unrelated. There is not the same differences between QH's and Paints as there is between QH's and Arabs or TB's. QH's have an entirely different look and temperment than the average arab even if they are participating in the same event. TB's look much different than the vast majority of QHs. Even racing TB's look much different than racing QHs to a trained eye. As has been proven in the posts above a Paint halter champ looks just like a QH halter champ with the exception of color and markings.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

_>>>> Paint coloring as we now know is genetic_ 

OKKKKK.... isn't ALL coloring and patterning genetic? I am not sure what is meant by that.

_>>>> and the APHA is working to ensure that paint is bred to paint - I think much like the App assoc they are weeding out the Paint to QH breeding trend as there are enough in the gene pool to ensure both color and proven performance genetics - _

WRONG. The ApHC is NOT weeding out TB or QH (or Arab which is the 3rd allowed cross with ApHC Appaloosas.) Where is your source getting this info? There has been crossing out in the ApHC since the beginning in 1938, with it being limited to QH/TB and Arab back in 1985....A show rule was changed in 2002 that made it more 'risky' to cross out, but it was rescinded in 2007 (and it never took the crossing option away, just made it more or a risk to cross as far as what was show-able)-- so actually ApHC is MORE QH/TB/Arab-crossing friendly now than it was between 2002-2007.

_>>>>> it is still however a smaller association and not nearly as big or as $$ driven as the QH industry - Solid paints are still ineligable to show anywhere but $$ driven associations(NCHA, NRHA etc) and still are worth virtually 0 in the marketplace._

SOME solid Paints are worth next to nothing, and most are certainly worth less than their colored counterparts..... however your source is WRONG about where they can or cannot be shown. Paint shows can (and many do) have classes for solids. Solids can be raced in Paint races. The Paint World Show has classes for solids and in fact has been adding more. here is the 2009 World Champion Solid paint-bred 2 and over Stallion-- 









Here is the 2007 and 2009 APHA World Champion Solid Paint in SPB Western Pleasure.









IMO your source is not as well-informed about things as you think they are.


----------



## PaintsPwn (Dec 29, 2009)

Yeah, the SPB information is wrong to the highest level. The rule books are available online for FREE - how about someone go read one? -rolls eyes-

My filly is SPB and is an APHA Futurity Champion. There's lots of SPB's out there showing at APHA shows all across the nation.

Mercedes, I mean this with no offense at all, but your friend needs to get a darn rule book (or many) and do some serious reading.


----------



## QHDragon (Mar 6, 2009)

I have to agree with ETW, I had always been told that QHs and Paints started out as the same breed, and branched off in the very early history of the QH and Paint breed. There is so much crossing to QHs and TBs that I think you would be hard pressed to find a Paint that did not have at least one QH or TB in their immediate pedigree.


----------



## Mercedes (Jun 29, 2009)

Actually, my source is in the middle of the QH AND Paint world, which is not btw, in Northern Utah, Michigan or Indiana. :wink: They are very involved in many aspects and as I've stated already, are friends or acquaintances of most anyone who's anybody in that sector of the equine world. That includes the last decade+ of world champion riders and trainers...many of whom are clients of my source. That isn't an exaggeration, it's a fact and I've been in many of the barns of those champion riders and trainers.

Response...


Of course I am aware that QH now allows excess white - I am also aware of the embryo transfer rules, HYPP, Herda debates rules, ad nauseum - I keep up with AQHA but since the question was APHA that man should have known that - I didn't think I needed to clarify in my answer that excess white QUARTER HORSES are eligible for registration in the AQHA!

He's trying to argue the most ridiculous point - they are in fact a separate breed - that simple - it's not different than arguing are QH's & TB's the same breed because the QH originated from a lot of TB stock in the foundation stages. 

And as for showing - showing at the APHA world is big *poo* - ask him how many horses where actually in the class - although on second thought there were probably a lot in the non -colored class - since yes they have a handful of classes at PAINT shows and most breeders end up with a gut load of non-colored stuff - *why can't they show AQHA if they are just a QH? *

As for value - sit through the sale at APHA world sale once. If he thinks your source isn't as well informed as he thinks, fine - but if I realized we needed to argue semantics and make sure our posts included every single nuance of the registration and showing processes I'd have given a more clear answer.





Everything else aside, the question is valid...if Paints were in fact 'Quarter Horses', then the non-colored Paints would be allowed to show AQHA. However, they are not, because the AQHA does not recognized them as Quarter Horses.



> *They are different breeds but they share far too many of the same bloodlines and characteristics to be completely unrelated.*


Well, thank you for finally stating that they are indeed a different breed. I do believe that's what I said orginally that you argued against. 

That they resemble each other within the same discipline at the upper level was never relevant to what I said, nor was it something I was arguing. That simply goes without saying.

The fact remains, I can usually tell them apart because I see differences in them structural (in general), and have often found their temperaments to be different (in general).


----------



## PaintHorseMares (Apr 19, 2008)

Mercedes said:


> Everything else aside, the question is valid...if Paints were in fact 'Quarter Horses', then the non-colored Paints would be allowed to show AQHA. However, they are not, because the AQHA does not recognized them as Quarter Horses.


This can obviously be an never ending discussion, but I would just like to say that the logic above is faulty with respect to whether Paints and QHs are the 'same' horse. The breeds, both Paint and QH, are defined solely by words in their registry's rule books, _which have their own, self serving agendas_, and now that both organizations basically 'tolerate' solids/crop outs, those definitions are soley based on parentage. 

...but, the AQHA still _prefers_ their horses to be solid and the APHA still _prefers_ them to be colored, regardless of the build, disposition, parentage, or skills of the horse.

To me, the following from the AQHA rulebook (205d) sounds so silly that it always makes me laugh, and reminds me of how us left handed folks were treated when I was a child. The APHA doesn't go quite as far in their rule book wording, but the poor solids are still segregated to a separate registry.

*205. GENETIC DEFECTS AND UNDESIRABLE TRAITS
(d) White Markings: A ​*​​​​​​​​​_horse having white markings with underlying light skin beyond any one of the following described_
_lines shall be eligible for registration by AQHA _*only if it is parentage verified through DNA typing the offspring, its
sire and its dam. Breeders should be aware that the American Quarter Horse, while long recognized, identified
and promoted as a solid-colored horse, can and does occasionally produce offspring with overo paint
characteristics. Such markings are uncharacteristic of the breed and are considered to be undesirable traits.
The following notification shall be placed on registration certificates of horses exceeding these marking
limitations:*​*
"This horse has white markings designated under AQHA rules as an undesirable trait and
uncharacteristic of the breed."​​​​​*​ 
No offense to anyone. We own Paints instead of QHs because we prefer the coloring, but are stock horse lovers regardless. They are, after all, the same ;-).


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

_>>>> Actually, my source is in the middle of the QH AND Paint world, which is not btw, in Northern Utah, Michigan or Indiana. :wink:_

???
Was anyone arguing geographic relevance? 

If we were, or if we are going to...... FWIW just because someone lives in MI or IN or UT doesn't mean they've never been to CO, TX or OK... or that they don't communicate with people there..... and other places. :lol:

Where is your farm, Mercedes? Any links to pedigrees and photos of your Paints you can share?


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

_>>>>> Well, thank you for finally stating that they are indeed a different breed. I do believe that's what I said orginally that you argued against. _

Actually you are missing the point that no one here is denying that they are "seperate" breed registries-- one being APHA and one being AQHA. They are seperate. They don't allow total crossover. But its because of individual rules on paper-- NOT because the horses they register aren't related or similar or judged by the same standards.... because the horses APHA and AQHA ARE for the most part very similar, very related, and they ARE judged by almost identical standards and in many cases by the very same double-carded judges.

Whart most of us ARE arguing against are your statements such as;

_"With the specialization of QH's for each of the western disciplines, *the QH looks very different than the Paint* in most cases...over and above the color factor. There also tend to be *very distinct differences* in temperament." 
_
Or the fact that you said..... 
_>>>> There certainly are alot of QH's that don't have Paints in them for breeders who want to compete in AQHA only...too risky if they get color, even from a breeding stock Paint. _

But then you/your source contradicted that by saying-- 

_>>>>> Of course I am aware that QH now allows excess white _

And you quoted your source as saying, 

_>>>>> Solid paints are still ineligable to show anywhere but $$ driven associations(NCHA, NRHA etc) and still are worth virtually 0 in the marketplace._

But then you quoted them contradicting themselves by saying-- 

_>>>>ask him how many horses where actually in the class - although on second thought there were probably a lot in the non -colored class - since yes they have a handful of classes at PAINT shows _

And finally, as an Appaloosa person who is very much involved my breed, I KNOW the claim below made by your source is VERY wrong---

_>>>>Paint coloring as we now know is genetic and the APHA is working to ensure that paint is bred to paint - *I think much like the App assoc they are weeding out the Paint to QH breeding trend* as there are enough in the gene pool to ensure both color and proven performance genetics - _

But when I pointed that out, and asked where the info came from, your source apparently didn't have an answer?

_ 


_


----------



## haviris (Sep 16, 2009)

Ok, I'm late I know, I agree w/ those saying they are the same, different registeries, yes, but otherwise basically the same. Chances are if you swapped the papers of a solid world champion paint and showed him in an AQHA show against QH, no one would notice. 

I'd love to see someone post several examples of QH and Paint and see how many could tell which was which. I know I couldn't and I've owned both forever. 

People don't breed Paint to QH to double register, because w/ a Paint in the pedigree it wouldn't be eligable for AQHA. And they don't not breed QH to Paint because of the fear of excessive white, they don't because then it would be a Paint, not a QH.

Now is where it gets confusing, when I say they are the same, I mean mentally and physically, but they do have separate registries so are technically separate breeds. Therefore, I would not call the OP's horse a QH/Arabian, she's Paint/Arabian, but I think technically she'd be Pinto Arabian?

I think Paints are one of the more misunderstood breeds, and being a Paint person, I do have little peeves related to that. 

Now for the reason I bothered to post, did anyone else try to look up the sire? Because I couldn't find anything w/ the name and the number took me to a blue roan overo mare?!


----------



## Honeysuga (Sep 1, 2009)

I have a feeling the "source" and the poster are one in the same...


----------



## PaintsPwn (Dec 29, 2009)

> They are very involved in many aspects and as I've stated already, are friends or acquaintances of most anyone who's anybody in that sector of the equine world.


This merits absolutely nothing. I had a VET, a freaking CERTIFIED, TRIED AND TRUE veterinarian tell me, he saw an HYPP N/N horse have an HYPP attack. Okay? People are freaking stupid in all class levels, despite money or how popular they may be. See for example, Cleve Wells.





> I have a feeling the "source" and the poster are one in the same...


I do so agree with you!


----------



## shmurmer4 (Dec 27, 2008)

Horses and rhinos are both in the order, perissodactyla; that is all.


----------



## Seahorseys (Nov 14, 2009)

haviris said:


> Now for the reason I bothered to post, did anyone else try to look up the sire? Because I couldn't find anything w/ the name and the number took me to a blue roan overo mare?!


Thank you for trying to locate the sire for me! In an interesting turn of events, I was misinformed. The sire is registered with the PtHA, not the APHA, #103393. Now this opens up another debate, as I was told her father was a Paint, but he's registered with the Pinto Horse Association! So now uncovering what she truly is is another mystery. I just got finished sending all her paperwork for the AHA and PtHA to the original breeder to be signed, and she said she would send me back her parent's papers. I feel like Sherlock Holmes!, lol. 

However, in good news I thought would be cute to share, after I contacted the breeder she sent me pictures of Frida's dam, sire, Frida's sister, and the last two are Frida one day old!!! The dam lives close by, so I'm going to see her on Friday for fun.

Any ideas on what you think of the sire's appearance? He looks so small, and he's next to a purebred arabian, she can't be more than 15'2, I'm guessing. What does he look like?




























& Baby Frida!


----------



## Mercedes (Jun 29, 2009)

PaintHorseMares said:


> This can obviously be an never ending discussion, but I would just like to say that the logic above is faulty with respect to whether Paints and QHs are the 'same' horse. The breeds, both Paint and QH, are defined solely by words in their registry's rule books, _which have their own, self serving agendas_, and now that both organizations basically 'tolerate' solids/crop outs, those definitions are soley based on parentage.


It's not faulty at all. All registries have their own 'self serving agendas'. And while it may be solely words that define the differences, the fact remains the two breeds were always different and are recognized as such by different 'heritages', different breed 'names', different 'shows', different 'criteria' et al...

Regardless of the fact that some breeders decided to cross the Paint with the QH to ensure performance with their color, still does not change that the two breeds were always different.

Regardless of the fact that some breeders decided to cross their Paints with enough QH blood to see many structural similarities such that they resemble QH's, doesn't change that those individuals are not recognized as QH's by *the* QH Registry, and that the two breeds were always different.



I was asked to add the following:

You might also add that since you actually have to QUALIFY for the AQHA world - ie show in available breed shows in your area and compete against enough horses to earn points required in your event to qualify to show in OKC - rather than load your "colored QH" in the trailer and haul to Ft Worth and show in whatever event you want - this again points out that - there are not enough Paints to warrant breed shows in all areas of the country to make horses qualify.

Look at the APHA Site and AQHA site - the number of world show attendees speaks VOLUMES on my comment of - smaller - worth less $$ - virtually nothing for non-******** (they can also easily access Triangle Sales online, or any other all breed ranch horse sale and compare the value of mediocre bred QH's to better bred solid paints. Didn't take me three days to research those figures either. 

So the numbers are smaller - dollar value is less - one spot for non-******** - oh, unless you count the $$ associations I mentioned - and we see how many solid paints burning up the $$ in those events? - all easily provable facts - hmmmm guess I better get informed eh?


.


----------



## Mercedes (Jun 29, 2009)

Eastowest said:


> Was anyone arguing geographic relevance?


I was merely pointing out that my source lives where all the QH and Paint action is, and therefore does indeed have many firsthand connections with the people in those two sectors; talking to them face to face at their farms, the World Shows, the big sales, riding with them, competing against them etc.. Getting the facts from the horse's mouth so to speak. 




> Where is your farm, Mercedes? Any links to pedigrees and photos of your Paints you can share?


What does the horse in the avatar look like? A QH? :lol:


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Mercedes said:


> I was merely pointing out that my source lives where all the QH and Paint action is, and therefore does indeed have many firsthand connections with the people in those two sectors;


I live smack dab in the middle of apple country. Apple farms all around me. I even talk to apple farmers. I guess using your logic I am an expert on apple growing.


----------



## Mercedes (Jun 29, 2009)

Honeysuga said:


> I have a feeling the "source" and the poster are one in the same...


It's a shame you have such problems comprehending various writing styles and diction. Of course, you can always just go ask Spyder, she knows me well enough to know I couldn't have been bothered. If I have something to say, I'll say it under my own handle.

Thanks so much, darling, for adding to the topic of the thread. *thumbs up*


----------



## Mercedes (Jun 29, 2009)

Alwaysbehind said:


> I live smack dab in the middle of apple country. Apple farms all around me. I even talk to apple farmers. I guess using your logic I am an expert on apple growing.


Actually, that wasn't the logic at all, nor the point. But you might be an apple expert. I certainly wouldn't be asking someone who's lived their life in Alaska about apples. I'd actually want to talk to someone who's grown an orchard or two in their lives and dealt with all aspects of apples; various varieties, experimentation with different fertilizers and sprays, has a broad knowledge base of apple pests and diseases, and so on. Having a couple of apple trees in your backyard just doesn't cut it.

Just as I wouldn't ask someone for in depth information on QH's who's never been more involved than breeding a couple of foals, riding in a local show or two, and has only perused their rule book to see if their Paint cross would be eligilbe for AQHA registration. I'd actually want to talk to someone who's 'in the game'. While I appreciate the grassroots people and their importance, it's the people at the other end who are running the show and making the changes because they're the ones with the power.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

I just do not see how you can ASSume that just because of where some one lives how much they know about a certain thing. 

I would then logically deduct that someone who proudly posts photos of them self riding a very inverted horse knows very little about riding. :wink:


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

Mercedes said:


> What does the horse in the avatar look like? A QH? :lol:


Honestly - looks like a draft cross.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

Ahh.... your mare's sire has PtHA registration-- well that clears up some of the mystery. Her sire Britches In A Twist was sired by Sierra Lucky Dee Bar, who is registered both Pinto and Paint. here is a link to his pedigree-- 
Sierra Lucky Dee Bar Paint

This photo says its of Sierraluckydeebar (Pinto did say it was spelled all run together like that)

http://www.zootoo.com/photo/photoslug90384?OXwxMjgyNzB8bnxufG58MA==

The dam to Britches In A Twist is Withafancytwist, who is registered PtHA only (according to PtHA records) and they were not too forthcoming about giving out additional pedigree info over the phone. Once you get the papers, they may tell you more as far as pedigree-- also Pinto has an online database for PtHA members.


----------



## Seahorseys (Nov 14, 2009)

Wow, thank you so so much! The mystery is almost unraveled! Now I just need to find out more about her sire's dam! This has been really neat, she's got some well-known horses in her bloodline! I do see quite a few Quarterhorses and Paints mixed together in her grandfather's pedigree, ha, so maybe she truly is half Quaint.

Question though. If you look back, you see a sire; Sonny Dee Bar; is registered as a QUARTERHORSE, as is the dam he mated with, Nicky Bar McQue. So how did two QH's produce Super Son Dee, a PAINT? It happens again with Thistle Sox Jr. and Barber Rose. How is this possible?


----------



## Seahorseys (Nov 14, 2009)

Alwaysbehind said:


> I just do not see how you can ASSume that just because of where some one lives how much they know about a certain thing.
> 
> I would then logically deduct that someone who proudly posts photos of them self riding a very inverted horse knows very little about riding. :wink:


Come on now, let's stay civil. I've been unbiased, as the debate has been interesting and engaging enough, both sides bring up great topics to consider. It doesn't have anything to do with how someone rides.


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

Mercedes said:


> People will claim upside, backwards, and forwards that Paints and QH's are the same. They no longer are the same. It would be like saying the Andalusian and Lusitano are the same. They also are not.
> 
> With the specialization of QH's for each of the western disciplines, the QH looks very different than the Paint in most cases...over and above the color factor. *There also tend to be very distinct differences in temperament*.
> 
> ...


Just in case anybody forgot the post that started the debate and subsequent thread drift. The sentance in bold is the one I have the disagreement with. All horses will have different personalities but on average paints and QHs will have very very similar temperment because they originated in the same areas and are bred for the same thing. They have seperate registries but thier breed standards and the purpose they are bred for are exactly the same with the exception of color. They both need the temperment to perform the same way. If you looked at 5 paints and 5 QHs you might decide that there were different temperments between the two breeds but if you looked at 100 examples of each breed there would not be a difference in temperment. However if you looked at 100 QHs or paints compared to 100 Arabs you would notice profound differences. 

I believe that everyone knows there are two two seperate registries. Nobody is argueing that they are in fact two different breeds but the breeds are so closely related that they are distinquished only by color and in some cases not even that.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

_>>>> Question though. If you look back, you see a sire; Sonny Dee Bar; is registered as a QUARTERHORSE, as is the dam he mated with, Nicky Bar McQue. So how did two QH's produce Super Son Dee, a PAINT? It happens again with Thistle Sox Jr. and Barber Rose. How is this possible? _

The Quarter Horse gene pool has sabino(s), splash, and frame overo in it. These genes, when their white-producing tendencies are more highly expressed, create white leg, face and body markings that have been loosely classified as "overo" markings. (Now that we know more about them, we know they are severalseperate genes, but early on, they were all lumped together as they created similar phenotypes, especially at their lower levels of expression.) 

When AQHA was founded in the early 1940's, and for many decades thereafter, horses that had white past certain limits could not be AQHA-registered. The two predecessor registries that merged to form APHA in the 1960's, the American Paint Stock Horse assoc. and the American Paint QH assoc., were formed as a place to register paint-marked stock type horses including these "cropout" paint-marked horses from QH parentage. (Some would argue that the APQHA formed specifically for this purpose-- hence the name-- and the APSHA had this as a primary purpose as well.)

The Paint horses in your mare's pedigree that came from 2 AQHA parents were part of this era-- they qualified by color and by bloodlines, since until around 2004, APHA accepted any combination of registered Paint, AQHA, or Thoroughbred breeding for parentage of color-qualified horses. There were also some horses maintained both AQHA and APHA registration, since AQHA allowed a little morer white than APHA's minimum, so some registered QHs thereby qualified for both APHA and AQHA.

IIRC, it was in 2004 that AQHA rescinded its registration ban on those "too much" white horses, and began to register any offspring of two registered AQHA parents. (They left a show restriction on these excessive white horses-- their papers are noted and they can't be shown in a halter class.)

Soon after, APHA enacted a rule requiring all applicant horses for APHA registration had one registered Paint parent. This would stop registration of "new" cropouts-- but it does not stop AQHA x AQHA registered horses from being registered paint, as long as one of the AQHA parents also has APHA papers, which a fair number did, and still do.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

One point we have touched on but not specifically discussed in this debate is SELECTION. 

Mercedes said:

_""You will of course find some individuals that resemble each other between the breeds depending on genetics, but shared blood several generations back is of no consequence and irrelevant. Only the first couple of generations matter.""_

When we are talking about the type and traits a breed or bloodline has, the "blood"' from earlier generations is NOT irrelevant, because the genetics you talk about come from those ancestors-- especially if at some point your gene pool becomes closed. 

How those genes pass on are controlled in ssignificant measure by breeder selection. You and I could start with the same founding stock, but if you continually select for and breed forward the tallest thinnest horses in each successive generation, and I continually select for and breed forward the shortest stockiest horses, after several generations, our herds will look different, even though they share common ancestry.

With Paints and Quarter horses, overall, BREEDER SELECTION has been for similar if not identical type and traits. A horse that comes from even 10 generations of Paint x Paint breeding will not necessarily look or act any different in than its QH cousins, if the breeders along the way selected for the same consistent type and traits in each generation. They are registered in 2 different places (for the most part, LOL), but their ancestry and their phenotype and temperament will greatly resemble one anothers'.

Now, I DO believe that there could be Paint breeders that limit their breeding programs to specific Paint x Paint lines, and they might even have a list of unique traits they are trying to preserve and breed forward that are not as commonly found in the "general run" of Paint horses. But these would be the minority, and would be considered a breeder group of horses-- NOT the definition for the entire breed.


----------



## Honeysuga (Sep 1, 2009)

Mercedes said:


> It's a shame you have such problems comprehending various writing styles and diction. Of course, you can always just go ask Spyder, she knows me well enough to know I couldn't have been bothered. If I have something to say, I'll say it under my own handle.
> 
> Thanks so much, darling, for adding to the topic of the thread. *thumbs up*


No problem sweetypoo.


----------



## thunderhooves (Aug 9, 2009)

As an answer to a question, the reason that nowadays they can't register a solid paint with the AQHA is becuase of BLOODLINES. Paints have sperate paint lines from QH's, so if it was a 3 generation solid paint, it couldnt be with the QH because it doesn't have uch QH blood in it. 
I do find Qh's and paints to be very similar, but their lines are different(for paints) until you get back to the QH's again.
Take my horse, Chance, for example. He is a solid paint, but has lots of QH names. And TB's. But because he isn't decended from just QH's, he can't really be a QH. Tiny Chex Bar Paint 

I hope I'm making sense! APHA's and Qh's are like the same, but not. Back awhile ago, they were like the same. Even now, they are pretty much the same. But the Paints were/are derived from Qh's, but QH's can go back being pure QH's for generations(until TB's). So now with so many paint bloodlines, and their color, they are seperated from QH.
IMO, they should just make it the Colored Quarter Horse ***. and consider paints Colored QH's because they are very similar. And they can make exceptions to Arab/Tb crosses in there.

Its so hard to explain, sorry if I messed you guys up!


----------



## haviris (Sep 16, 2009)

Mercedes said:


> What does the horse in the avatar look like? A QH? :lol:


I agree, looks like a draft cross, pretty!


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Great post Eastowest.


----------



## QHDragon (Mar 6, 2009)

First off, I live in MI in the middle of blueberry country, I ride at a farm owned by the largest blueberry farmer in the area, I talk to them a lot, sometimes about blueberries. Does that make me an expert in blueberries? Not hardly. Area has nothing to do with how much you know about one thing.

Plus I would hardly say that here in MI we are hardly in the backwoods. We have a good sized circuit as well as some famous stallions standing right here in our state.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

QHD, Blueberries...drool.... Sounds very yummy.


----------



## riccil0ve (Mar 28, 2009)

This whole thread boggles my mind. It's almost like watching Jerry Springer. 

My thought right now, although I have no knowledge on registries or bloodlines, is that QH's and Paint's are the same and different. Just like a Clydesdale and a Shire are the same and different. Just like a TB and a Warmblood are the same and different. ALLLLLLLL horses started from the same place, those little four [?]-toed creatures, and have since adapted and have been tamed and manipulated by humans to make what that particular human thought was best.

The bottom line is, a horse is a horse is a horse is a horse is a horse. They are all different and they are all the same. Just like people, we are all different races and shapes and sizes, but at the end of the day, we are all people, and we are all the same.


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

That would be a good analogy if any of those breeds had been the same in the last 100 years. AQHA and APHA are not very old.


----------



## Seahorseys (Nov 14, 2009)

So East to West, are you saying that all the breeders in the Paint world got together and said these are the traits we want for our Paint breed, and everyone began to breed specifically for those ideal traits, then a more distinguishable breed could arise due to that? It seems as if that won't happen, because Paints compete with alot of QH's, do alot of the same things, so they cannot be very variable as far as body type and temperament or else the new "Paint" breed would not be successful. I just can't get over the fact that two Quarterhorses made a Paint. It just kind of conveys to me that it has been strictly a color thing, at least up until recently. I truly did not know!


----------



## riccil0ve (Mar 28, 2009)

kevinshorses said:


> That would be a good analogy if any of those breeds had been the same in the last 100 years. AQHA and APHA are not very old.


Was that directed at me? If that's the case, I think I said I really didn't know a whole lot about all this stuff, it just goes over my head, lol. So I have no idea when breeds were "created." My point, really, was just that all horses and breeds came from the same place. Even if the QH and Paint are newer breeds, they still came from the same basic place, know what I mean?

I just hardly see the point in arguing about whether they are the same or different. To me, it's like arguing over a typical looking Arab as opposed to a not typical looking Arab. They're both Arabs right? My Paint is long and sleek and not at all built like the normal, typical, desirable QH. So I suppose that would put her on Mercedes side of the argument. My guess is there are a lot of Paints who look just like QH's, and a lot of Paints that don't.



Seahorseys said:


> So East to West, are you saying that all the breeders in the Paint world got together and said these are the traits we want for our Paint breed, and everyone began to breed specifically for those ideal traits, then a more distinguishable breed could arise due to that? It seems as if that won't happen, because Paints compete with alot of QH's, do alot of the same things, so they cannot be very variable as far as body type and temperament or else the new "Paint" breed would not be successful. I just can't get over the fact that two Quarterhorses made a Paint. It just kind of conveys to me that it has been strictly a color thing, at least up until recently. I truly did not know!


Just because a lot of Paints are shown in the same type of events doesn't mean that they can only do that event. My mare is a jumper, she loves to jump. All breeding should be about bettering the breed, and as I mentioned before, the breeding is a manipulation to bring out what the individual breeding wants to see. So maybe the Paint will try to surpass the QH in those events, or branch out and become more conformationally suited to jumping, eventing, or dressage. Who knows.

And just something to think about, if there is any color gene, no matter how far back it goes, is in a horses pedigree, it can always pop back up. There are times when a white couple will have a black baby, because somewhere down the line, one of the parents had a black relative. Please note, this isn't supposed to sound racist, I'm not sure what the politically correct term for a black person is anymore...


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

riccil0ve said:


> There are times when a white couple will have a black baby, because somewhere down the line, one of the parents had a black relative.


That really doesn't happen!


----------



## PaintsPwn (Dec 29, 2009)

> And just something to think about, if there is any color gene, no matter how far back it goes, is in a horses pedigree, it can always pop back up.



This is false; as show below:
Cremello X Sorrel = Palomino
Palomino X Bay = ..Let's go with buckskin for giggles.

Palomino X Buckskin = Buckskin
Buckskin X Outside Black Based Gray Mare = Buckskin Based Gray


.... Basically, just cause there's a Cremello in the heritage, doesn't mean you're going to get one unless you specifically breed for it - and even then the only 100% if you breed back to another cremello. I'm not going to breed a bay stallion who had a Palomino sire to my sorrel mare in hopes to get a Buckskin or a Palomino. It's just not possible.

​


----------



## BlueJayWay (Feb 8, 2010)

> My Paint is long and sleek and not at all built like the normal, typical, desirable QH


The Quarter horse is changing too though no? They're getting to be more sporty from what I see.


----------



## thunderhooves (Aug 9, 2009)

BlueJayWay said:


> The Quarter horse is changing too though no? They're getting to be more sporty from what I see.


or more muscle-y


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

The point of this whole thread ( if there is one ) is that Paints and QHs compete in a variety of events and have several different types of conformation to do those events. A horse bred for Hunter Jumper is going to look much different than a horse that is bred for cutting regardless of spots or not.


----------



## QHDragon (Mar 6, 2009)

BlueJayWay said:


> The Quarter horse is changing too though no? They're getting to be more sporty from what I see.


I have noticed too, horse that won in western pleasure 30 years ago would look like back yard cow ponies in the western pleasure arena today. They seem to be going for long legs, tucked up bellies, and pencil necks. Granted I like the QHs that look more like TBs, but I don't consider them real QHs, I consider it a QH x TB. 

The western pleasure and HSUS paints are going the same route too, long legs, tucked up bellies, and pencil necks.

Which once again goes back to paints and QH are basically the same thing these days. When it comes down to it people like to win, and so they are going to watch what horses are winning and then breed what wins. And since a lot of QH judges are also Paint and Appy judges, and they are going to look beyond the color and for basically the same kind of movement and headset, etc.


----------



## riccil0ve (Mar 28, 2009)

PaintsPwn said:


> This is false; as show below:
> Cremello X Sorrel = Palomino


That palomino has a cremello gene, does is not? And it can pass that gene on to it's baby, can it not? Just because the palomino and the palomino's baby aren't cremello doesn't mean it won't pop up in later breedings down the line that could bring it back out, or by accident.


----------



## PaintsPwn (Dec 29, 2009)

^ You need to go do some research on horse genetics. There is no 'cremello' gene. There is a dilute gene.

Double Dilute - Cremello/Perlino
Single Dilute - Buckskin, Smokey Creme, Palomino, etc..
And No Dilute - Bay, Sorrel, Black.

A palomino will ONLY produce a cremello if bred to a cremello - or a perlino I suppose also could work. A palomino will NEVER throw a cremello on anything else.


----------



## rockaway (Jan 14, 2010)

HI - okay I tried to follow the thread. I know less than nothing in this area but can you clear this up for me- maybe it has been and I just didn't follow - sorry 
I was under the impression that a Paint has to have quarter horse or thoroughbred or a mix - period. That is what defined a paint from a "pinto" which is just colour. I read that a paint can be double registered - aqha and apha. So a paint can be a pure- bred quarter horse - hence it looks like one but it could also be a pure-bred thoroughbred - hence you may see the thinner lines. 
Searched and found this from 

The International Registry of Colored Horses

Horses accepted for registration in the APHA result from these combinations only: Paint x Paint, Paint x QH, Paint x TB, QH x QH, TB x TB, or QH x TB. Purebred Quarter Horses or Thoroughbreds are welcomed into the APHA registry as long as the horses have enough white to meet minimum color requirements. The Jockey Club does not discriminate against white, so Thoroughbreds with enough white to be registered in the APHA can also be double-registered in the Jockey Club. Likewise, with the relaxed white restrictions in the AQHA, horses may be double-registered with the AQHA and the APHA.

to me it says that a paint is either a TB or QH or combination -that the paint started as an outcrop of the TB and/or QH.


----------



## thunderhooves (Aug 9, 2009)

rockaway said:


> HI - okay I tried to follow the thread. I know less than nothing in this area but can you clear this up for me- maybe it has been and I just didn't follow - sorry
> I was under the impression that a Paint has to have quarter horse or thoroughbred or a mix - period. That is what defined a paint from a "pinto" which is just colour. I read that a paint can be double registered - aqha and apha. So a paint can be a pure- bred quarter horse - hence it looks like one but it could also be a pure-bred thoroughbred - hence you may see the thinner lines.
> Searched and found this from
> 
> ...



the part I bolded is what stands out to me. I don't think that's the American Paint Horse Association. That may be a different registry, but IDK.


----------



## riccil0ve (Mar 28, 2009)

PaintsPwn said:


> ^ You need to go do some research on horse genetics. There is no 'cremello' gene. There is a dilute gene.
> 
> Double Dilute - Cremello/Perlino
> Single Dilute - Buckskin, Smokey Creme, Palomino, etc..
> ...


I never said I did research. In fact, I said twice that I haven't done any and virtually know nothing, I'm just using logic. So thanks for clearing that up for me. So I'll change my statement. Any horse can pass on any color in its lineage except cremello. Yes?


----------



## PaintHorseMares (Apr 19, 2008)

rockaway said:


> Horses accepted for registration in the APHA result from these combinations only: Paint x Paint, Paint x QH, Paint x TB, QH x QH, TB x TB, or QH x TB. Purebred Quarter Horses or Thoroughbreds are welcomed into the APHA registry as long as the horses have enough white to meet minimum color requirements. The Jockey Club does not discriminate against white, so Thoroughbreds with enough white to be registered in the APHA can also be double-registered in the Jockey Club. Likewise, with the relaxed white restrictions in the AQHA, horses may be double-registered with the AQHA and the APHA.
> 
> to me it says that a paint is either a TB or QH or combination -that the paint started as an outcrop of the TB and/or QH.


The APHA rules were changed in 2005 to require that at least one parent be a Paint, so the QHxQH, etc combinations are no longer allowed.


----------



## thunderhooves (Aug 9, 2009)

PaintHorseMares said:


> The APHA rules were changed in 2005 to require that at least one parent be a Paint, so the QHxQH, etc combinations are no longer allowed.


because it (the APHA) has come far enough to where there is paint bloodlines for the Paint horse, not just pintos of different breeds. thats wha the Pinto registry is for.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

_>>>> I never said I did research. In fact, I said twice that I haven't done any and virtually know nothing, I'm just using logic. So thanks for clearing that up for me. So I'll change my statement. Any horse can pass on any color in its lineage except cremello. Yes? _

No.

Just because a horse has a color in its lineage does NOT mean it can pass on that color. Having a certain colored ancestor does not mean that the horse in front of you inherited the gene to make that color in its offspring. 

For example, you were talking about the cream gene. Palominos have one creme gene and one non-cream gene, cremellos have 2 cream genes and no non-cream gene. A cremello might have 2 chestnut grandparents and several chestnut great-grandparents, but a cremello can never produce a chestnut because it does not have that non-cream gene itself to pass on to offspring. 

On the flip side, a palomino has one of each gene (cream and non cream), and so bred to a chestnut, a palomino can produce a chestnut foal. That chestnut foal cannot ever produce palomino unless bred to another horse that provides the cream gene, because that chestnut horse does not itself have a cream gene-- doesn't matter that its parent did, the chestnut horse didn't inherit it.

Same with several other colors and patterns-- tobiano, appaloosa, silver, grey, dun, and etc-- a bay horse could have a pedigree loaded with dun ancestry, but that bay horse itself doesn't have the dun gene, so it won't make a dun foal, ever, when bred to a non-dun mate.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

Originally Posted by *PaintHorseMares*  
_The APHA rules were changed in 2005 to require that at least one parent be a Paint, so the QHxQH, etc combinations are no longer allowed._

_>>>> The APHA rules were changed in 2005 to require that at least one parent be a Paint, so the QHxQH, etc combinations are no longer allowed._

*>>>> because it (the APHA) has come far enough to where there is paint bloodlines for the Paint horse, not just pintos of different breeds. thats wha the Pinto registry is for.  

*Its been MANY years since APHA allowed any other blood besides QH and TB-- and they still do allow QH and TB-- They didn't close their books to crossing, just started to require that one parent has to be APHA registered.

There are definitely Paint people who disagree with the rule change, and feel that APHA's rule change was less about the breed, and more about political maneuvering, because it appears that APHA made the change "in retaliation" to AQHA's allowance of paint-colored horses-- horses that formerly could only be registered APHA.... 

Besides, it is definitely still possible for AQHA x AQHA horses to get registered with APHA--because in some circumstances that 'one paint parent' has both AQHA and APHA papers.


----------



## PaintHorseMares (Apr 19, 2008)

Eastowest said:


> There are definitely Paint people who disagree with the rule change, and feel that APHA's rule change was less about the breed, and more about political maneuvering, because it appears that APHA made the change "in retaliation" to AQHA's allowance of paint-colored horses-- horses that formerly could only be registered APHA....


Agree 100%



> Besides, it is definitely still possible for AQHA x AQHA horses to get registered with APHA--because in some circumstances that 'one paint parent' has both AQHA and APHA papers.


Indeed. I find the whole dual registered situation amusing, especially in light of this thread...is it a Paint? or a QH? ...wait... it's BOTH! _and _therefore you can (in the current rules) perpetuate this duality to the offspring.


----------



## ridesapaintedpony (Apr 14, 2009)

kevinshorses said:


> You must be using photoshop!! No way can that be a real paint. Why it looks just like the other horse.


I got into this late, but this totally truly made me laugh out loud.


----------



## riccil0ve (Mar 28, 2009)

Eastowest said:


> _>>>> I never said I did research. In fact, I said twice that I haven't done any and virtually know nothing, I'm just using logic. So thanks for clearing that up for me. So I'll change my statement. Any horse can pass on any color in its lineage except cremello. Yes? _
> 
> No.
> 
> ...



Oh, I see, I see. So how is it possible for two solids to throw a pinto? Isn't that the situation with the OP and her horse?


----------



## Seahorseys (Nov 14, 2009)

riccil0ve said:


> Oh, I see, I see. So how is it possible for two solids to throw a pinto? Isn't that the situation with the OP and her horse?


No, her mother is a bay. Her mother's sire was Black, her's mother's dam was a chestnut. Both my horse's mother's parents were born out of Bay sire's and dam's. My horse's father is a pinto, but he is not a homozygous pinto. I was just talking about that to my horse's mother's owner. She thought it was odd that my horse's mother threw pinto 2 out of 2 times.


----------



## Lonestar22 (May 22, 2009)

kevinshorses said:


> The point of this whole thread ( if there is one ) is that Paints and QHs compete in a variety of events and have several different types of conformation to do those events. A horse bred for Hunter Jumper is going to look much different than a horse that is bred for cutting regardless of spots or not.


The point of the thread was to help someone figure out their horses linage. And to differinciate (sp?) the diffrence between a paint and a pinto. Not whether or not Paints and QH's are the same breed or not. Just sayin.


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

Lonestar22 said:


> The point of the thread was to help someone figure out their horses linage. And to differinciate (sp?) the diffrence between a paint and a pinto. Not whether or not Paints and QH's are the same breed or not. Just sayin.


Good point. Perhaps I should have said "the point of this thread drift" instead.


----------



## Eastowest (Mar 26, 2009)

_>>>> The point of the thread was to help someone figure out their horses linage. And to differinciate (sp?) the diffrence between a paint and a pinto. Not whether or not Paints and QH's are the same breed or not. Just sayin. _

Actually... below is a direct quote friom the OP in the very first post of this thread--

*""Also, I've heard some say there are no American Indian Paint Horses, that most of the time that means they are basically QH's, so some people even call my horse a Half Arab/Half QH. What's your take? Does she even look like a QH? do Paints look like QH's?"" *

So, the Paint/QH question was indeed asked by the OP.
Just sayin'. :lol: :wink:


----------



## Seahorseys (Nov 14, 2009)

and oh, did I ever get an answer.


----------

