This is interesting to me. In dog shows, the judge is judging each individual dog against the standard, not against the other dogs in the ring (or he/she should be) and then picks the dog that is the closest to the standard.
Now, in a Western Pleasure class you would think they would be able to account for a horses size and say "he is moving correctly base on his size" and not just say "oh he passed up the 15 hand horse, so it is wrong." I mean, I know that isn't exactly what you are saying but... In order to have an all around horse, it seems you must have one large enough to compete in the HUS classes and not so big that it can collect enough to not be passing up all the 15 hand horses.
To me, that seems sort of... wrong. Shouldn't they be able judge the horse over all and see that even though the stride is longer due to his size, he is an amazingly collected horse, is using himself well, set head etc.... so he places well? Did that make sense? It did in my head. I guess I am not sure how to ask the question in my head. Also, I never want to offend anyone and it seems so many people here are in Hyper defense mode about their breeds.
I know that mode, I used to be there about Saddlebreds because they were so looked down on by, um, Western people. Ha ha I have learned to ignore most of that but I do wish to educate about things when I see someone jumping to wrong conclusions about my favorite breeds.
Last edited by Inga; 09-30-2012 at 01:15 PM.