This isn't really a critique thread, it's more of an answer gathering/brain picking thread that has to do with conformation. Just saying. =)
I'm trying to understand the mechanics of a long back. For instance, in Lacey's case, she has a long back (or at least people tell me she has one) because she has short legs. Her barrel and length of body are almost perfect for her neck length and size (according to my conformation book) but her legs are disproportionately short, giving her that long backed look. If her back was any shorter (so that her legs and back would be proportionate) she would have to be ridden in pony saddles or something (it's barely long enough for 15 inch western saddle).
(she looks super butt high in this picture, the ground was way uneven)
In other cases, the horses legs are proportionate to body size yet the back is just super long.
Random internet picture:
Are both of those long backs? Which one is better? do they have the same pitfalls of weakness and stuff because the leg to body ratio, or whatever, is off? Maybe I'm completely wrong?
Yes, they both have long backs. My mare also has a really long back, and the biggest problem I've found is that she has a harder time getting her hind end underneath and pushing from the rear. She just has a long way to go! Lol. I've also heard that a long back makes for a less-comfortable ride. Once I taught Ricci to carry herself better, the ride has improved dramatically, but other than that, I don't know anything.
I always thought of Ricci as proportional, even though people often thing she is sway-backed, which isn't the case.
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:16 PM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0