The Horse Forum banner

1 - 20 of 56 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
23,610 Posts
Because many people seem to care for nothing but looks in the show /breeding scene... & beauty is in the eye of the beer holder! And people buy them without understanding or consideration of health & soundness... Often thinking if it's show bred & exxy it must be good, so there's a market.

The first horse is just ugly all round imo, like one of those 'improved' beef bulls. And looks like it wouldn't be all that much more athletic or long term sound either. Second horse looks like he has a nice hind end, but mismatched, light on compared to the heavy front half - looks like a TB hind on that beefbull front.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,327 Posts
Both horses are breeding fit weighted, or aka overweight and it shows!

I am not a fan of many halter horse builds today but older stock were nice looking, well balanced and "good-using" horses..
Years ago few people had "just" a halter horse but the animal had to also ride and ride decently...
Today with such class specific wants, all many halter horses do is halter so...tweaked and tweaked till what you see is what you often get.
No thank-you, not for me.

The second horse actually has many positive attributes seen and going for it.
Bred to a mare who has weak to his strong, nice to his nice the chances for a nice baby and growing youngster increase.
You are also looking at color, and if the horse throws dominant color patterns could attract many a breeding his direction.
He also has a using build...
For a horse with minimal muscle he is not so out of balance...he is a stud and exhibits many traits of a stud who only is used for stud duties, not ridden much if at all...his job is breeding not riding I would think.
I don't know either stallions nor their lineage...

Based on bone structure if I was looking to breed I would go for the second horse to service my mare over the first horse just because my horses are not statues but riding horses and need to be able to do their job under saddle.

Based upon the pictures you found and presented, the quality of the animals appearance and set-up of the animals for positive results seen, my guess is both of these animals have full books for breeding duties...:cautious: ;) :rolleyes:
🐴...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,983 Posts
I have written ad nauseum on the subject of the communal psychology which ends up causing extreme deformation of appearance and disregard of functionality in animal breeding. I have thought about it for decades. But briefly, the way it goes is:

1. Humans are extremely visual animals. They are obsessed with the way things look, and it is a very rare skill to be able to "see beneath the surface", so to speak. My goat mentor would never keep a breeding animal with flashy markings because she felt that she, and others, would grade that goat higher than it deserved, and she knew she couldn't stop herself. Wise woman.

2. The way appearance competitions work, and they CANNOT work any other way, is that the animal which has the edge wins. The edge will be "just a little more" of something -- if muscularity is emphasized in the judging standard, the muscliest, if refinement, the most refined. Since the animals come from the same general breeding pool and closely resemble each other, this edge will be usually be quite small, at any given point in time.

3. Winning animals are bred together to produce more winning, i.e. more extreme, animals. Of these, the most extreme are always selected. These extreme animals are more and more inbred (google 'popular sire syndrome'), and start showing the weird homozygous problems associated with inbreeding without culling for unhealthy traits, along with both the deformation of type, and the passing on of unsoundnesses which don't affect winning.

Even if you, as a breeder, begin to worry about the direction you see the show ring heading, you only have two choices -- quit, or keep doing what everyone else is doing. You have no influence over the direction toward extremeness, and -- this is important to understand -- neither does anyone else. Not judges, not writers of breed standards, no one. The system runs the system, not the participants. Judges are not hired back if they use the standard to judge by, once the breeding pool has moved past the standard into extremity. It makes me tired to hear the same old rants: if the judges only! If breeders only! It's all about winning! (well, duh). There is only the game, which runs itself.

What happens after a breed is so extreme or so sickly it is no longer functional? One thing that does NOT happen is the fanciers who bred those animals collectively realize with horror what they have done. Nope. They always double down, with a giant cloud of denial and nonsense. They have invested their lives in this charade, they are not going to give it up. No, what happens is, popularity wanes, new people do not replace the old, while at the same time, a parallel, you might call it a reform group, arises, which invariably intends to showcase the original type of animal which no longer has a place in the appearance competitions. Typically this also involves some activity which showcases the original use of the animal.

I have seen this happen in several species and any number of breeds. It appears to be a kind of inevitable progression.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
26,793 Posts
The first horse is a halter sire and he has won a ton. People who show halter or breed halter want to breed to a proven stallion - that is what he is. You breed for what you are looking for.

Frenchmans Boogie is also a proven sire. Barrels I believe. People breed to them for what he can produce.

What's the reasoning behind the question?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,251 Posts
If you are stallion shopping the great thing is you have close to unlimited choices of stallions and can choose who you breed your mares to.

The palomino horse is Frenchmans Boogie. While I'm not huge on the Frenchmans Guy bred horses I'm not opposed to a Sun Frost(Frenchmans Guy's sire) and had good luck with them although they can be a tough ride.

I'm not big on Frenchmans Boogie's look(conformation) and I don't know a lot about him. But I believe he has out produced himself in the barrel pen.
Something to consider is, he was a performance horse(producing performance horses) winning money rather than a look being chased by what judges want to see or a trend.

Again while not my choice but at least he produced performance winners.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,012 Posts
Halter horses are one of the main reasons I will not knock grades and Mustangs. They are more often the sound, usable animals of the bunch. There is nothing "wrong" with purebred animals in theory. I really love most all horses. But as long as stock halter horses are being bred like the first one.........give me a nice Mustang any day!

Also, with purebred animals comes great responsibility to prevent doubling down on hereditary defects. Because members of the same breed are bred back to each other from the same gene pool, you have a much greater chance of passing along defects. That's why crossbred animals are usually healthier. It's not that you can't have healthy purebred animals, but it is a lot harder. And when what wins is a result of defect (like HYPP) then breeders will often look the other way.

Now wouldn't a person who rides their horses rather have something like this?

1111654
1111655


The Frenchman's horse isn't "pretty" either, but he's sure a lot prettier than halter horse! The hocks in particular on the halter horse make me go :eek:!

I really don't buy that color trumps conformation in a breeders eyes. I guess I'm not a breeder, but I LOVE color on a horse. Pintos, Appaloosas and blacks make me swoon. But color will not cover up ugly conformation. If it does, the person knows zilch about conformation. Maybe that's the root problem......lack of education among buyers. But I don't see why you can't have color AND conformation. With all we know about genetics today and all the fancy ways to get your mare bred to a stallion across the country, it shouldn't be that hard to have both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
442 Posts
I googled QH stallions, and came across these horses. My question is why are people breeding for this?
I think of it as different strokes for different folks. Everyone has their own definition of what they want out of horses. A halter bred QH is good for some, others might want an Andalusian, some people love mules. To me, it's fun to see all the breeds and their advocates.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,012 Posts
@trailhorserider -- that's one fine little horse you got there.
Awe, thanks, but he's not mine. He was a horse I was admiring at a BLM adoption. He had gone through an inmate training program and was trained and ready to go. At the time I had too many horses.

But this guy was a wonderful BLM Mustang I owned until he passed away. Best trail horse ever!
1111688
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,156 Posts
The first one would be alright if his hocks were normal and he wasn't so overweight. He'd still be ugly IMO but he might be sound to ride. Those hocks....

The yellow horse is disproportioned but otherwise alright. Maybe if he gained some backside muscle and lost some weight he'd look better. He's pretty at a glance.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
23,610 Posts
I think of it as different strokes for different folks. Everyone has their own definition of what they want out of horses. A halter bred QH is good for some,
Yeah, IMO 'different strokes' is fine, until it impacts on health & soundness of the animal - which with horses like that first at least, dog breeds, obscenely heavy beef cattle, huge uddered dairy cows, dwarfed animals kept as pets... Etc, we have caused suffering in the animals we claim to love & care about - which IMO is NOT good for any.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
442 Posts
Yeah, IMO 'different strokes' is fine, until it impacts on health & soundness of the animal - which with horses like that first at least, dog breeds, obscenely heavy beef cattle, huge uddered dairy cows, dwarfed animals kept as pets... Etc, we have caused suffering in the animals we claim to love & care about - which IMO is NOT good for any.
Oh, I agree. I've seen plenty of blind and deaf double Merle Aussies, brachycephalic bulldogs, etc through my job. I'll add broiler chickens to your list of oversized production animals. Humans seem to be dissatisfied unless they take it to the extreme. What can be done?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bsms and loosie

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
23,610 Posts
What can be done?
Well I read Avna's very interesting thoughts, as, perhaps nothing can be done - the animals(& people) are just the 'subjects' of an unstoppable process(Avna?)? But while humans have proved ourselves... not very intelligent on... a few occasions, I believe there is hope, in educating people about it - I do believe people generally do this blindly, ignorantly, not because they know better & don't care, so if we continue to educate people of the health & soundness probs... dunno how much difference on the meat/milk(etc) industries, but if more people were educated & choosy about the meat they ate...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,023 Posts
Quarter Horses are very discipline specific these days. The only ones that are good (in my opinion) examples of what the breed is supposed to be are the Race Horses (Dash for Cash), Roping Horses (Driftwood), and Ranch Horses (pick one).

Because the Quarter Horse show world is so diverse, and people really hone in on what is a winner in that specific show class/sport you don’t see much crossover at all. Reiners and Cutters for example are a very different kind of horse, as much mentally as physically.

Personally I find the old Stock Horse that could do it all the real Quarter Horse but that horse hasn’t existed for several decades now aside from a few ranches that have held on to it.

Here’s a Stallion that I really like all the colts I’ve seen by him, heavy Cutter breeding which is not a bad thing. Bet Hesa Cat (Highbrow Cat x Bet Yer Blue Boons)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,012 Posts
Quarter Horses are very discipline specific these days. The only ones that are good (in my opinion) examples of what the breed is supposed to be are the Race Horses (Dash for Cash), Roping Horses (Driftwood), and Ranch Horses (pick one).

Because the Quarter Horse show world is so diverse, and people really hone in on what is a winner in that specific show class/sport you don’t see much crossover at all. Reiners and Cutters for example are a very different kind of horse, as much mentally as physically.

Personally I find the old Stock Horse that could do it all the real Quarter Horse but that horse hasn’t existed for several decades now aside from a few ranches that have held on to it.

Here’s a Stallion that I really like all the colts I’ve seen by him, heavy Cutter breeding which is not a bad thing. Bet Hesa Cat (Highbrow Cat x Bet Yer Blue Boons)
It looks like a very edited photo......but he is certainly very attractive! But would he be just as attractive as a solid chestnut? (Maybe, maybe not?) My only concern is that aren't the Highbrow Cat horses prone to that skin tearing disease? Not saying this particular stallion is, but I recall reading that. There was even a theory that a single copy of the gene is what makes them so flexible and athletic. But he is certainly much better built than the two horses at the beginning of this post, that's for sure.

One thing that always bothers me about a lot of QH's is the big body on the spindly legs and tiny feet. I had a friend with a beautiful QH mare. Well bred, expensive horse. The only thing I would change about her is I think she needed larger bone and feet. Sure enough, the horse was diagnosed with navicular. Correlation? Who knows, but I always felt like QH's in general need more bone and foot for their size. Just about every other breed of horse on the planet has larger foot to body ratio than the QH. Heck, in the photo of the pretty roan it is so edited that you can't even SEE what his feet look like.

The friend's horse I mentioned was probably a good 1200 lbs at least, and she had an "0" sized foot. My chestnut Mustang a few posts above was 14.3 and wore a size "2" when he did wear shoes (I switched him to barefoot). I honestly don't understand why they don't breed QH's just a little heavier boned. I think they would be healthier for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,251 Posts
He's a nice horse! I haven't ridden any of his offspring, so I'm curious.

Bet Yer Blue Boons was a Freckles Playboy daughter out of a King bred mare. Just goes to show how prolific Freckles Playboy continues to be 35 years later in several disciplines. Amazing horse. If I remember right he still in the top 20 producing maternal grandsires for both reined cow horse and cutting. He has proven to be desirable in the barrel pen as well.

I have a Freckles Playboy grand daughter who is also King bred on the bottom, I bred her to a lesser known HBC stud for a foal this month.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,251 Posts
It looks like a very edited photo......but he is certainly very attractive! But would he be just as attractive as a solid chestnut? (Maybe, maybe not?)
Just to answer your question, cow horse people don't care about color, especially cutters. They prefer a sorrel. The roans came later and it wasn't from breeding for color, it came from having successful horses.


My only concern is that aren't the Highbrow Cat horses prone to that skin tearing disease? Not saying this particular stallion is, but I recall reading that.
HBC is (N/Hrd) but when bred to a (N/N) there isn't issues.
Bet Hesa Cat, the horse pictured, is 6 panel N/N.
 
1 - 20 of 56 Posts
Top