long backs and downhill vs. uphill questions - Page 2
   

       The Horse Forum > Horse Breeds, Breeding, and Genetics > Horse Colors and Genetics

long backs and downhill vs. uphill questions

This is a discussion on long backs and downhill vs. uphill questions within the Horse Colors and Genetics forums, part of the Horse Breeds, Breeding, and Genetics category
  • Correct conformation in horse
  • Correct conformation of a horse

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
    02-07-2011, 11:40 PM
  #11
Weanling
It also varies by breeds the correct conformation for a CS horse requires the back, neck, hip, and barrel to be about the same length...


From the Center for America's First Horse

Downhill conformation is considered a fault as it can lead to problems down the line
     
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
    02-08-2011, 06:56 AM
  #12
slc
Weanling
The length of the back is a separate issue - and most people don't have a good eye for length of back.

There are two parts of the back that make up its total length - the saddle piece, and the area behind the saddle. The saddle piece is the area behind the withers where the saddle is/will be. The area behind the saddle is far less supported, and length there, can be more of a problem than length in the saddle piece.

The 'length' of the back (overall) is relative to the other proportions of the horse - leg length, neck length. All 3 need to work well together. While there are rules for various systems of evaluating horses, there is room in sport for some variation in these proportions.

For example, a slightly longer backed horse may gallop rather well and do very good lateral work - as long as he doesn't have other faults that might add up and cause an issue, such as weak, narrow or stiff hind quarters. A shorter backed horse might be easier to bring together and balance, thought it might be harder for it to stretch out and cover ground - again, if it has other conformation faults. Each type has advantages and disadvantages.

It's important to remember that conformation faults tend to occur in groups, creating an an overall weakness. For example, a weakly muscled, long area behind the saddle, plus hind quarters that push out behind the horse, and straight hocks. It's important to learn to see the overall picture.

Too, each horse always represents an overall type - heavily boned, heavily built, vs very tall, leggy and fine. It is not so much that there is any specific 'conformation fault', it's whether the type is suitable to the intended use. For example, a draft horse can have a very good type - for a draft horse. But you probably wouldn't enter it into the Kentucky Derby. Type doesn't have to be that extreme to affect the use. People need to learn to see the overall type, and instead of criticizing every horse because it doesn't fit, say, for Western Pleasure or Reining, see what it IS good for.

To get a better eye for these proportions, you can learn to squint at the horse to blur out all details, and you will see more the overall proportions, instead of the details.

Keep in mind that it's very hard to evaluate a photograph. Photographs tend to distort proportions. A photo taken from below makes the legs look longer, a photo taken from above makes the legs look shorter. If the horse is stood up at an angle to the camera, his back can look overly long or overly short. In Quarter horse pictures, there's a tendency to pose the horse with its hind quarters at an angle toward the camera, to emphasize the hind quarters and make them appear larger. This angle makes the back look short when it is not.

The biggest error I see is people (esp on the bb's) declaring a horse has a 'short back' when it does not. This is probably the commonest error when people try to critique conformation. Often the photo angle, a deep chest or long neck wil fool the observer into thinking the back is 'short' when it isn't, but there is no real pattern to what causes people to not see the length of back.

Comparing the length of the horse's body overall, to leg length, can help. With a lot of practice and being corrected by a more experienced person, eventually a person will get an eye for this proportion.
     
    02-08-2011, 08:51 AM
  #13
Green Broke
Quote:
Originally Posted by slc    
The length of the back is a separate issue - and most people don't have a good eye for length of back.

There are two parts of the back that make up its total length - the saddle piece, and the area behind the saddle. The saddle piece is the area behind the withers where the saddle is/will be. The area behind the saddle is far less supported, and length there, can be more of a problem than length in the saddle piece.

The 'length' of the back (overall) is relative to the other proportions of the horse - leg length, neck length. All 3 need to work well together. While there are rules for various systems of evaluating horses, there is room in sport for some variation in these proportions.

For example, a slightly longer backed horse may gallop rather well and do very good lateral work - as long as he doesn't have other faults that might add up and cause an issue, such as weak, narrow or stiff hind quarters. A shorter backed horse might be easier to bring together and balance, thought it might be harder for it to stretch out and cover ground - again, if it has other conformation faults. Each type has advantages and disadvantages.

It's important to remember that conformation faults tend to occur in groups, creating an an overall weakness. For example, a weakly muscled, long area behind the saddle, plus hind quarters that push out behind the horse, and straight hocks. It's important to learn to see the overall picture.

Too, each horse always represents an overall type - heavily boned, heavily built, vs very tall, leggy and fine. It is not so much that there is any specific 'conformation fault', it's whether the type is suitable to the intended use. For example, a draft horse can have a very good type - for a draft horse. But you probably wouldn't enter it into the Kentucky Derby. Type doesn't have to be that extreme to affect the use. People need to learn to see the overall type, and instead of criticizing every horse because it doesn't fit, say, for Western Pleasure or Reining, see what it IS good for.

To get a better eye for these proportions, you can learn to squint at the horse to blur out all details, and you will see more the overall proportions, instead of the details.

Keep in mind that it's very hard to evaluate a photograph. Photographs tend to distort proportions. A photo taken from below makes the legs look longer, a photo taken from above makes the legs look shorter. If the horse is stood up at an angle to the camera, his back can look overly long or overly short. In Quarter horse pictures, there's a tendency to pose the horse with its hind quarters at an angle toward the camera, to emphasize the hind quarters and make them appear larger. This angle makes the back look short when it is not.

The biggest error I see is people (esp on the bb's) declaring a horse has a 'short back' when it does not. This is probably the commonest error when people try to critique conformation. Often the photo angle, a deep chest or long neck wil fool the observer into thinking the back is 'short' when it isn't, but there is no real pattern to what causes people to not see the length of back.

Comparing the length of the horse's body overall, to leg length, can help. With a lot of practice and being corrected by a more experienced person, eventually a person will get an eye for this proportion.
Wow, thanks for that in-depth post. I agree that I think sometimes people get so caught up in looking for one flaw that they fail to put everything together as a whole.
     
    02-08-2011, 05:57 PM
  #14
Yearling
I agree with slc. To put some basic guidelines for numbers on length of back, I was taught in one of my equine science labs that in general the back should be 1/2 the length of the underbelly (I believe it's 1/2). And the back length is measured from the withers to the croup, like so.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg back.jpg (20.3 KB, 135 views)
     

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Questions about Pro - long post Pro Horse Training 3 06-30-2010 01:24 AM
Showing this weekend, just some questions! **LONG** eventerwannabe Horse Shows 46 10-27-2009 06:10 PM
I need LOTS of help! Many questions, very long! grayshell38 Horse Training 18 10-04-2009 12:07 AM
The uphill/downhill debate... Does it matter? Supermane Horse Riding Critique 13 01-24-2009 06:35 PM
A few questions about my mustang(LONG POST) RebelsRose Horse Training 14 06-27-2008 03:04 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0