This site requires the Adobe Flash Player.
straightegyptians

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> For Discussion, Thoughtful, Considerate Way, Interesting topic
phanilah
post Feb 14 2008, 07:55 PM
Post #16


Advanced Senior Member
******

Group: Members
Posts: 1046
Joined: 22-March 03
Member No.: 201



I meant to add this to my previous post...but I'll just start fresh with a new post.

The table IS NOT a stand alone document and it's only part of what a judge "thinks about" when judging. Although I'm glad more judging info is being provided, I do wish the additional aspects of the breeding class sections from the judges handbook were also included...it's not just about the table.

Here is the breed standard:

AR102 Breed Standards.
Comparatively small head, profile of head straight or preferably slightly concave below the eyes; small muzzle, large nostrils, extended when in action; large, round, expressive, dark eyes set well apart (glass eyes shall be penalized in Breeding classes); comparatively short distance between eye and muzzle; deep jowls, wide between the branches; small ears (smaller in stallions than mares), thin and well shaped, tips curved slightly inward; long arched neck, set on high and running well back into moderately high withers; long sloping shoulder well laid over with muscle; ribs well sprung; long, broad forearm; short cannon bone with large sinew; short back; loins broad and strong; croup comparatively horizontal;
natural high tail carriage. Viewed from rear, tail should be carried straight; hips strong and round; well muscled thigh and gaskin; straight, sound, flat bone; large joints, strong and well defined; sloping pasterns of good length; round feet of proportionate size. Height from 14.1 to 15.1 hands, with an occasional individual over or under. Fine coat in varying colors of bay, chestnut, grey and black. Dark skin, except under white markings. Stallions especially should have an abundance of natural vitality, animation, spirit, suppleness and balance.


It's the judges job to select the animal that best fits the above description - that includes taking faults related to soundness and faults related to type, the overall harmony and balance of the horse, movement, etc. weighing everything and coming up with a result. The winner should not only be a sound, well conformed horse, but it should also look like an Arabian....so there will be type faults that don't affect soundness, but do affect the overall appearance of the horse as being 'Arabian'. These aren't just breeding classes, they are Arabian breeding classes.

Beth
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
phanilah
post Feb 14 2008, 08:09 PM
Post #17


Advanced Senior Member
******

Group: Members
Posts: 1046
Joined: 22-March 03
Member No.: 201



QUOTE
I'd wonder about a definition for swan neck as well. Maybe it's a different context than I've heard it used everywhere else?


JMO, but this is also one of the drawbacks to the table re: the terminology used and how it can mean different things to different people.

Many people refer to a swan neck in the postive, meaning the horse has a nice, pretty, elegant arched neck. But, if you look at the shape of a swan's neck, it's more S shaped, which isn't what you want for a horse. So, I suspect the table refers to the more S shaped neck. Clear as mud? wink.gif

Beth
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eyegor
post Feb 14 2008, 08:28 PM
Post #18


Advanced Senior Member
******

Group: Members
Posts: 690
Joined: 13-May 06
Member No.: 3423



The shape of the neck has been described as approximating a Palm frond, leaving the neck at an appropriate angle at an appropriate depth, (not at an acute angle but smoothly and a taper upwards) leading to a natural arch at the poll with an open throatlatch. A swan neck would be for me a narrow neck all the way from withers to poll with inadequate depth at the jowl and restricted room for an air passage.....
Palmfrond is just how I prefer them..
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CenturyOak
post Feb 14 2008, 08:32 PM
Post #19


Advanced Senior Member
******

Group: Members
Posts: 748
Joined: 29-November 03
From: North Texas
Member No.: 1019



QUOTE (phanilah @ Feb 14 2008, 09:09 PM)
JMO, but this is also one of the drawbacks to the table re: the terminology used and how it can mean different things to different people.

Many people refer to a swan neck in the postive, meaning the horse has a nice, pretty, elegant arched neck.  But, if you look at the shape of a swan's neck, it's more S shaped, which isn't what you want for a horse.  So, I suspect the table refers to the more S shaped neck.  Clear as mud? wink.gif

Beth
*



Yup.. mud would be one word! biggrin.gif ph34r.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clearcreekarabia...
post Feb 14 2008, 09:45 PM
Post #20


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 32
Joined: 25-October 07
Member No.: 9190



I have a problem with listing any leg fault as a major fault compared to a head fault. Conformation is more important than the head. That said, yes, I want them to look like Arabians but leg faults are harder to correct through breeding than a plain head. And they are BREEDING classes. IMO--These are MAJOR leg faults.

Major Faults of the Head and Type
E. Excessively close set ears
F. Excessive narrow head
G. Excessive length to head


Minor Faults of the Front Legs and Feet
A. Toe in (pigeon toed)
B. Buck knees (knee sprung)
Minor Faults of the Rear Legs and Feet
A. Stands under (sickle hocks)
B. Toes out
Minor Faults of any Leg
A. Broken axis of pastern and hoof
B. Feet out of balance

I’m with Demelza Hoogeveen on this one. Each horse needs to be evaluated on their own merit. But I’d give my left arm to watch some of these halter horses gallop without falter down a steep rocky slope, or any slope for that matter. LOL!!!
Barbara
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nancy Bourque/Ib...
post Feb 15 2008, 03:16 AM
Post #21


Advanced Senior Member
******

Group: Members
Posts: 880
Joined: 12-May 03
From: New Brunswick, Canada
Member No.: 425



I've always understood that a swan neck was a longer neck with a heaviness at the underside of the neck where it joins the chest. I think it's the heaviness/thickness at the underside of the base of the neck that is objectionable. It prevents flexing the neck and getting the proper headset when collecting the horse. I haven't thought about that one for a while but I would assume it's associated with some of the shape of a ewe neck as well on top.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ShaeMcC
post Feb 17 2008, 10:02 AM
Post #22


Senior Member
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 216
Joined: 3-December 07
From: Texas, United States
Member No.: 9826



QUOTE (Nancy Bourque/Ibriz Arabians @ Feb 15 2008, 04:16 AM)
I've always understood that a swan neck was a longer neck with a heaviness at the underside of the neck where it joins the chest.  I think it's the heaviness/thickness at the underside of the base of the neck that is objectionable.  It prevents flexing the neck and getting the proper headset when collecting the horse.  I haven't thought about that one for a while but I would assume it's associated with some of the shape of a ewe neck as well on top.
*

I asked around about the "swan neck" and this is what I've been told"

- A swan neck ties in lower to the chest, interfering with the shoulders' ability to swing freely, also referred to as a "nest." Just picture chest + neck = nest)
- A swan neck has a backward curvature and/or is at too vertical of an angle for the horse to be able to properly collect. (also referred to as an "upside down neck")
- A swan neck also makes riding very difficult, and the horse often has a tight headset to neck while remaining in such a vertical position. (picture a seahorse)


Just a bit of what I've heard around!
Shannon
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
An American Bree...
post Feb 17 2008, 06:30 PM
Post #23


Gold Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1618
Joined: 6-July 03
Member No.: 606



I am getting some feed back from these Major and Minor faults as I have been asking

So how about these?

Tied in at the Elbow? Major? Minor? (to me it is Major)

Excessively High and Flat Croup? Major? Minor?

Camped out behind in the Rear Legs? Major? Minor? (to me this is Major)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th October 2014 - 14:40
This site requires the Adobe Flash Player.