Re: RC: Re: Now Cannons was Belesemo

[Bette Lamore <woa@stormnet.com>]

You're absolutely right, Heidi, and Friga was race mare of the year at
Los Alamitos 3 years in a row and I believe she was only 13.3!
Never-the-less, if you are a tall or a heavy rider or just like riding
tall, you are going to feel more comfortable on a bigger horse. For
years people like my husband (6'5") had to go to other breeds as there
were no Arabs big enough for them. Now the Russian horses (and the
French horses-- and I am not talking about the "Anglo-Arabs" of late)
bred for athleticism and height because they knew, both horses being
equal in terms of the speed gene, good conformation, and athletic
ability, the horse with the longer stride (who is the one with the
longest legs---ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL) will win. Now that is not to say
that shorter horses with more athleticism will lose nor that taller
horses with less athleticism will win.
So I guess we are back to what you said in your prior post, and I quote
you "Not a
one 
of these measurements means a thing if not related to the whole horse."
And I would take that to apply to height as well.
Bette
Bette Lamore
Whispering Oaks Arabians, Home of TLA Halynov
http://www.stormnet.com/~woa
I've learned that life is like a roll of toilet paper, the closer it
gets to the end, the faster it goes. Smell the roses!
CMKSAGEHIL@aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 1/30/00 9:46:22 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> provincmk@fanninelectric.com writes:
> 
> <<  If the horse is not 15.2 they will not look at it.
> 
>  I am sure there riders out there who feel they need this height---would
>  someone enlighten me as to WHY?    (Other than being very tall yourself.) >>
> 
> This has always puzzled me, too, Claudia--especially since many of the
> all-time greats of our sport are nowhere close to that.
> 
> Heidi

--