 |
Re: [RC] Standardbreds...& part... - heidiActually no, not at all. The original definition of a Standardbred is any horse (and you could breed whatever you liked to get it) that could trot a mile in harness within a specified "standard" amount of time (which has gotten to be less and less since the original standard was set back in the 1800s (and the breed now includes pacers as well as trotters). The horses are of predominantly thoroughbred blood (but not entirely). The breed was specified and designed exclusively as a trotting/harness horse. Yes, as I said, bred for speed. :-) The Saddlebred, on the other hand, was bred specifially to be a SADDLE horse (i.e. one to be ridden, not one to be used in harness), hence the name. And while they, too, trace in many lines to the Thoroughbred, they are bred to be smooth gaited riding horses and will usually be pretty well predisposed to the assorted variation of the four-beat lateral gaits of the assortment of gaited horses. And again yes, as I said--not bred for speed but for comfort. And while you are technically correct that the Saddlebred was bred to ride (hence the name) the breed has also historically been used in fine harness, displaying the same traits in harness for which it was bred for under saddle--ease and comfort, rather than speed. :-) So, while both breeds share a rather substantial amount of Thoroughbred ancestry (although not many of the same Thoroughbreds), their selection criteria have been completely different, since one was selected as a trotting harness horse and the other as a smooth gaited saddle horse. Yep, same traits I specified... :-) There are some Saddlebred afficianados who put Saddlebreds in harness and will use them for such; however, there are people who put arabian horses in harness too, despite the fact that neither of these breeds had ability as a harness horse as part of their selection criteria (and hard core drivers have a tendency to steer clear of them:)). In the times in which the Saddlebred was developed, a great many saddle horses did double duty as fine harness horses. I'd wager that a goodly percentage of Robert E. Lee's cavalry (many of which were mounted on Saddlebreds) were riding horses that knew how to drive as well. If I were looking for a good driving horse, I wouldn't start out looking at Saddlebreds, and if I were looking for a good riding horse, I wouldn't start out looking at Standardbreds. This doesn't mean that there are no individuals within these breeds that can be used for these purposes, just that it wasn't the original intent of the breed. While you are correct about the initial intent, the traits that the Standardbred developed in harness nonetheless make him an outstanding riding horse for purposes which entail going forward--such as endurance riding. And while you are correct that breeds such as the Arabian and Saddlebred were not initially bred to drive, the same attributes which make outstanding riding horses (balanced conformation, self-carriage, trainability, etc.) will also make for good driving horses. The Arab in the desert had no cause to be driven--there were few places in the Bedouin environment where pulling a wheeled vehicle was practical. But the Arab certainly took to being driven like a duck to water when he was first introduced to Europe and North America--and much of the unsuitability of modern ones has come about due to the same breeding practices that has diminished their usefulness as riding horses... Heidi =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|