[Big_Grey_hunter]

I completely disagree. I think the Chestnut has a better hind end. The Bay looks much straighter through his stifles and angles tell me he may lack power---especially for jumping. The Chestnut will likely have a very good jump given his angles and stifle placement.

Between the two...while the bay is prettier to my eye, the chestnut is more of the athlete I would pick.

I agree, I like the chestnut much better, especially the hind end. The bay looks like he'll move with his hind legs trailing out behind and have trouble really stepping under himself.

[leahandpie]

The bay is WAYY straighter behind than the chestnut!! And he has longer, more sloping pasterns behind. Yikes. He is pretty, but not built to last.

Here is a picture of the type of hind end that I like.
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...0_446780_n.jpg

[baxtersmom]

When the shoulder angle approaches vertical, it anatomically forces the humerus into a position more parallel to the ground, thus closing the shoulder angle. They are tied together functionally.

Um. No. That is simply not correct. While they may function together as a unit when the horse is in motion, a horse can certainly have a straight, open shoulder, or a straight, closed shoulder. The length of the scapula and the humerus in relation to one another and to the body will determine those angles.

Deb Bennett just did a great piece on it in Equus April 2012.

[Dr. Doolittle]

Um. No. That is simply not correct. While they may function together as a unit when the horse is in motion, a horse can certainly have a straight, open shoulder, or a straight, closed shoulder. The length of the scapula and the humerus in relation to one another and to the body will determine those angles.

Deb Bennett just did a great piece on it in Equus April 2012.

Yes.

And Deb Bennett is pretty much the authority on "functional conformation", since she studies and analyzes the skeletal structures in detail, explaining exactly how and *why* the bones move and "interact in relation to each other" to influence movement, performance, and future soundness. (Not that ANYTHING can really predict future soundness, of course...

The series in Equus was excellent (in it, over a period of 12 issues, she analyzed every single anatomical feature of the horse--from head to hooves and everything in between ), but I would also recommend her book:

http://books.google.com/books/about/...d=s-D2uAAACAAJ

I read this years ago, learned things I never realized I didn't know, and now have learned even more from the series in Equus. The detail she goes into is often quite exhaustive (and exhausting!), but what an education--and it will really help train your eye.

[Sannois]

He looks like my old man reincarnated!
Right down to the eye, the facial markings and the neck.
I can bet he improves much with age.

[judybigredpony]

Here you go same age same size and same color...same no starts 16H 3yr old TB G

Any diffrences....?

[big_red_ottb]

I love all of the pretty chestnuts! They remind me of my guy :-)

Comparing the two, I prefer the second horse's hind legs and shoulder by just a bit. I prefer the first horse's actual hindquarters over the second, however, and the first has a better topline. It looks like the second might have an ever-so-slight roach in his back? although that could just be the picture. I prefer the way the second horse's neck ties into his chest over the first horse's.

It looks like they're comparable movers, from the pics. Both have a nice reach with their front end. It looks like the second horse might track up a bit better, but that is hard to say without more photos.

I'd take them both home!

[baxtersmom]

Second fellow is in a different growth stage -- based on drawing a string line on him, he looks like he has another 3-4 inches to grow whereas first fellow only has an inch or so. Lighter all over. More length of neck but same shape; not as low in the stifle but more angulation in the hind legs, more open shoulder angle. Lovely proportions on the leg bones (cannon length 60% of forearm). Same dam, different sire?

[judybigredpony]

#1 A.P Indy Sire out of Arch mare

#2 is Carson City Sire out of Eastern Echo Mare

[baxtersmom]

Haha, blows that theory.

[frugalannie]

I prefer this second chestnut. He strikes me as having a less straight hind end, and I like how he stands over his front end. I also get the impression that he has much more to give in the trot, that there's a looseness there. The AP Indy gelding looked as if he was already using his limbs to the max and there was a tightness to his back and shoulder.

But any of the above can be changed sooooo much with training.

[wanderlust]

Like everything about the second chestnut better- lovely, lovely horse! Looking at the neck and front end, the first is going to be quite limited as to how much he can bring the shoulder up over the jumps. I suspect the second will jump beautifully square in front and get his knees way up like a classic hunter.

[judybigredpony]

16.2 4yr bay filly

[judybigredpony]

16.1 4yr TB G

[volvo_240]

Comparing the two it's pretty clear how much nicer the bay is! All the things wrong with the chestnut's hind end are oh so right in the bay. I wouldn't gamble on a horse with those post-legged hind legs. If his stifles aren't catching now, I would bet they will be.

I also must vehemently disagree. The bay horse's stifle is much straighter than the chestnut and also set much too high. The straighter hock angle on the chestnut is tricking the eye to make him look more post legged than he really is.

The bay has an overall uphill/round look to him that is initially more pleasing but I personally hate a stifle that straight. He would probably make a lovely lower level dressage horse due to his shape but I would take the chestnut if I wanted to jump and gallop.

[Dr. Doolittle]

I also must vehemently disagree. The bay horse's stifle is much straighter than the chestnut and also set much too high. The straighter hock angle on the chestnut is tricking the eye to make him look more post legged than he really is.

The bay has an overall uphill/round look to him that is initially more pleasing but I personally hate a stifle that straight. He would probably make a lovely lower level dressage horse due to his shape but I would take the chestnut if I wanted to jump and gallop.

Agree with volvo WRT the first two horses, but moving on: the two bay horses above are VERY nice! I particularly like the gelding, though he could do with a bit more length of neck, he is nicely balanced and his parts are harmonious; his movement is very elastic and "uphill." There's your athlete

[frugalannie]

I agree that the two bays strike my eye as being very nice. I'm trying to control for the extra year of maturity and the color, but I concur that they are better balanced, have ample engines, good shoulders and neck sets, nice toplines and reach up under themselves well.

There's only one I would bring home, though, and that's the filly. All my horses are mares except when one delivers a colt. So she's the standout for me.

[Napoles]

Agree with volvo WRT the first two horses, but moving on: the two bay horses above are VERY nice! I particularly like the gelding, though he could do with a bit more length of neck, he is nicely balanced and his parts are harmonious; his movement is very elastic and "uphill." There's your athlete

Completely agree. The only thing that is affecting the balance of his whole picture is that he is lacking a bit in length of neck - otherwise, lovely horse.

[judybigredpony]

[Koniucha]

Why does the picture show nothing and a red x?