Events
Groups
Rider Directory
Market
RideCamp
Stuff
I'm getting into this discussion late so I don't know what has been
discussed before.
Limb substance can be the same as the term bone, as in saying that the
horse should have a lot of bone. It refers to the cross-sectional width
and breadth of the supportive boney columns in the legs. Ideally a horse
should have a short cannon bone that is wide and broad and a longer forearm
that is also wide and broad, this would give the horse an ideally broad base
of support with less chance of snapping a limb than a horse that has a longer
finer cannon bone (greatest stress is on the lower legs). But limb substance
is a nebulous term that can also encompass the idea of broad flat substantial
joints which a horse with substance should also have. The bigger the joint
(assuming of course that it is normal and healthy and not enlarged via
a disease process such as arthritis) the better because again you are spreading
the stress out over a larger stronger area. The fetlock joint should be
round, the knee broad and flat and somewhat square looking when seen from
the front, the hock has numerous angles and curves but in general it should
also be large and substantial in appearance versus smaller and therefore
more flimsy looking. The idea here is that the entire boney column should
give the impression of great strength when compared to the weight of the horse,
and ideal horse would have big strong feet, bones, and joints with a relatively
small body to carry over them. Warmbloods are often held up as having great
bone but when you do an analysis of strength to weight they carry a much
greater proportion of weight over comparatively smaller bones, feet, and
joints than do Arabians -- BUT before you go thinking that an Arab is
therefore doing better with less, remember that if you have two 14.2 hand
Arabs weighing in at exactly 850 lbs. and one has bigger bones, feet, and
joints than the other, then that is the better constructed horse in terms
of substance. Too few of our modern bred Arabs have good bone to really
qualify as substantial horses. We need to breed better.
On the second question I prefer not to use open vs. closed angle
as a description in discussions of conformation because it lends itself
too much to interpretation and less to exactness (granted description is
hard to do). In general closed means that an angle between two bones connected
at a joint is more acute, open is of course the opposite, but obviously
the question is when is an angle open enough vs. too open. For the shoulders
what I prefer to see is that the angle that the shoulder makes with an
imaginary line horizontal line when the horse's forearm is exactly
perpendicular to said horizontal line should be between 45 and 50 degrees.
Obviously if the horse is not standing so that the forearm is perpendicular
to the horizontal line then the angle cannot be measured. Similarly when
discussing hindquarters (which I did a while back) I prefer to describe the
allignment of the bones with relation to each other and the rest of
the leg. For example the differences between a sickle-hocked horse and
a horse that is camped out, or a post-legged horse and one that is over
straight in the stifle are dependant on more than one quality, it is not just
angle but also the length of bones in relation to each other that determines
the exact relative conformation.
Hope that helps. By the way I thought you guys didn't want
conformation discussions on this list? At least that is what I was told by
one or two people when we were discussing this a few months ago, if not
say so and I'll be glad to chime in more.
Have fun!!!
Tracy and everybody
Tracy Scheinkman
Misty Mountain Arabian Sport Horses
Tucson, AZ
Events
Groups
Rider Directory
Market
RideCamp
Stuff