View Full Version : Dreaming of an Eventer: which do you think?

Nov. 12, 2009, 03:19 PM
I joke with my husband that Dreamhorse is my favorite porn site. :winkgrin:

Which one of these would you choose?




Nov. 12, 2009, 03:33 PM
They're all pretty nice. I can't decide between the first and the last one.

Nov. 12, 2009, 03:39 PM
For your purposes? The last one. As you will find as you start taking lessons, there is NO SUBSTITUTE for a horse that already knows the job. If you are both muddling along trying to figure out what to do, the situation gest dangerous. Fast. If you were to buy, say, #2, you would have to spend thousands of dollars to add the training/show experience the horse would need to take a brand new rider around a Novice course.

OTOH I would like to know why they only want $4500 for a C-3 schoolmaster. My only guess is his age (15), the recession, and the kid is probably needing a horse that can rate her up to the B or A rating (and this horse can't do it so they need the money ASAP to get the horse and have the girl ride it this winter in preparation for a spring rating).

If you were seriously shopping (which I know you are very much NOT) you could certainly look at #1 as well. Although if the horse was that bad at getting its spot in front of the fence in person as it is in the picture, I'd pass (again assuming a fairly new rier like yourself).

Nov. 12, 2009, 04:28 PM
#4 looks like a great horse to start out on.

#3 looks closer to 15.2 than 16.2 and I would not be bragging about a dressage score of 59! :lol:

#2 is a total unknown entity and may be barely broke--pass

#1 is handsome and probably worth a look

Nov. 12, 2009, 04:36 PM
I like #1.

#4 looks hotter. and is older.

The grey had bad dressage scores (IMO) for the level.

The mare is a mare. lol.

Nov. 13, 2009, 01:07 PM
For ME, it would be a toss up between the grey and the chestnut (I'm considering the grey horse green and not worrying about less than great dressage scores).

The mare doesn't impress me one bit. Don't like the look of her, don't like that she knows nothing, and, well, like purp said, she's a mare.

The older horse wouldn't be appropriate for me, but for you, that would be my pick. The low price tag doesn't bother me (we got the deal of the century last year on a prelim/int horse for one of our clients. There wasn't anything wrong with him, other than he wasn't going to be a world beater at advanced and the owner was desperate for cash). If I had a green rider, we'd be looking at that horse (NOT the green horses, and especially not a unbroke/barely broke broodie).

Nov. 13, 2009, 01:27 PM
I like 1, 3, and 4 for different reasons.

I'm not sure why everybody thinks that pricing SHOULD be high (or what I would call unreasonable), or there must be something wrong with the horse.

Some of the best horses I've had were reasonably priced - their owners had to sell, they were great for Pony Club but weren't going to win the year-end eventing award, or some other reason. The horses were sound and great for the purpose we bought them for.

In this economy, consider yourself lucky! Ask the right questions, take a knowledgeable friend with you, and get a PPE. You don't have to spend a fortune for a nice horse.

Beam Me Up
Nov. 13, 2009, 02:09 PM
I love looking at horse ads too!
I's kind of hard to compare stills to video (because if you had videos of the others you might like more/less than from stills), but I think it depends what you want to do.
For me, I'd want the video or to try 3.

#4 has mileage, which is great, but will be 17 next year and it being sold for novice and below, so depends on how that strikes you.

Don't love #2's pic.

#1's video was cute--he looked steady and huntery. Definitely a good guy. Not my personal type (less naturally uphill than what I want) but looks like he'd be nice to ride at lower levels.

I wouldn't ding #3 on a bad test alone, since he's 5 and green, though I wouldn't advertise that as a seller. It sounds like he has some x-c mileage, I'd want to see more.

Nov. 13, 2009, 03:01 PM
What Amanda said. Buy the horse that's already doing what you want to do. The been there/done that horse is worth his weight in gold. Even if he's a little older, I bet he's got lots of good years left, and there is just an awful lot to be said for the ones who know their job. I have seen far too many folks buy prospects hoping that they might pan out, when for the same or close price they can find something perhaps a little older but who they can go out and have fun with immediately. 'Course, it works out for folks like me, who has bought at bargain basement price as resale prospects a few of those "prospects" from folks who found out that green wasn't really as much fun as they thought'd it be , but for my own personal horse, I found one that I suspect would challenge YB's "find of the century" - a little older, not so easy on the flat Prelim/Int horse who is super safe, fabulous jumper, and who I completely unabashedly adore. When you find one that's just plain fun, you won't ever regret the fact that they are a bit older.

Nov. 13, 2009, 03:12 PM
That ad for the gray noted he also got a 65%, which is quite decent, especially for a green horse. (I'm reading this as straight dressage scoring, not eventing dressage.)

Nov. 13, 2009, 05:24 PM
Depends on what you want. I would chose the mare or the grey gelding (who is gorrrrrgeous!!)

The mare sounds like she hasnt done anything, and she is coming 7, so that would be a gamble
the grey is young and has had a little training.

The last is just old and hasn't accomplish terribly much except for novice. And the price is very low.
The chestnut just didn't thrill me, seems just like and average TB.

Nov. 13, 2009, 05:47 PM
It is hard to say, if you want a green horse that has done some schooling and such I would go with the grey, #3 because even though I liked #1 he sounds like he cant go higher than 3ft-but again if you are only going up to that high I would go with #1. If you want a horse that has been there done that, and been successful I would go with #4.

Perfect Pony
Nov. 13, 2009, 05:55 PM
#1 without a doubt. He looks like he has a good mind and he's a decent mover. He also looks like he would not have any problems jumping over 3'. The photo of him is horrific in the ad. Totally surprising as with the way he jumps in the video the owner could get a pretty striking picture of him for the ad! He's the only one of the 4 that I think is a bargain at 4k.

Edited to say I didn't realize the chestnut was 9. I still think he's a nice horse for the money and the nicest of the 4, but probably not your next eventing star! He's do well I am sure at BN/Novice though. I like a good brain.

Nov. 13, 2009, 07:06 PM
#1 is adorable affordable and good age.

The gray is more like 15.2 or ridden by a 6ft child.

The bay not enough to look @ in photo

The 15 yr old is to cheap/old, no mention of being sound unless I speed read ad.

Nov. 13, 2009, 07:25 PM
The 15 yr old is to cheap/old, no mention of being sound unless I speed read ad.
At his price and if he's really good at his job, I would take him even if there was upkeep involved. The occasional hock injections or fancy shoeing or whatever can come with a horse with age and mileage is ultimately far cheaper and more fun than a green horse with a green rider (at least in my book).

Nov. 13, 2009, 07:38 PM
The 15 yr old is to cheap/old, no mention of being sound unless I speed read ad.

Or maybe not.

We bought a 15 y.o. Training level packer (former OTTB) for $2200 CAN (mind you that was 10 years ago). He'd been the Provincial champion at 13 years old, was sold to a beginner, and turned out to be too much for her. He was sound & turned out to be perfect for what we wanted.

My sister went from her first horse to him, when she was 10 years old. She did Pony Club up to C2 (C3 in the US) and evented to Training. By then he was 19 years old and we felt Prelim would be asking too much. Much to my sister's disappointment my parents sold him to another Pony Club family (for $2500!), where he taught their 2 kids and then was leased for another 2 kids to ride for several summers, then a year's retirement until he was put down at about 24 because of persistent foot problems that he couldn't be made comfortable with.