Dressage Horse Conformation

[Velvet]

While I like many of the points in the article: http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/you-can-use-tricks-and-strings-choose-better-dressage-horse I was frustrated by the writer. What the heck is this supposed to mean???

“The harmony line: The horse should display harmony in its proportions from ears to tail. The length from the poll to the end of the muzzle should be the same as the length from the fetlock to the elbow, the chestnut to the ground, the point of the withers to the loin, the withers to the belly, the stifle to the hock, and the hock to the ground.”

[netg]

I feel as if the article was written by someone who didn’t fully understand what she was hearing. I don’t know who Patti is or anything about her, so could be wrong and the discussion itself may have been confusing…

From the quoted part - you would end up with a large-headed, downhill horse. So, no, not harmonious.

[Velvet]

Exactly! Well, other than the point that it sounds like everything relates to the length of the horses poll to the end of the muzzle. :lol:

[cnm161]

It’s pretty clear to me that she meant:

A line drawn from poll to muzzle is equal in length to a line drawn from fetlock to elbow = chestnut to ground = point of withers to loin = withers to belly (what part of the belly?) = etc., etc.

And that it’s mainly an aesthetic goal.

[MysticOakRanch]

I was there - my horse was one of the demo horses. The harmony line means all those measurements that are discussed by Patti in that paragraph should be about equal - showing a “balanced” horse. So if you measure muzzle to poll, using a stick, then that same length should apply to all the other “harmony” measurements. It is very difficult to explain it without a diagram (picture). And we were shown a diagram, but not provided with a “hard copy” of it, so it can’t be included in that article.

And you have to see the diagram to understand where the measurement is - the muzzle to poll is a much longer line then you might thing (it is more like muzzle to 2nd or 3rd vertebrae).

[Velvet]

Which illustrates the point much better and should have somehow been incorporated in the article. Or written a bit better so it was something people could visualize. (Bad writer and bad editor for some of this article?)

[netg]

[QUOTE=MysticOakRanch;8503392]
I was there - my horse was one of the demo horses. The harmony line means all those measurements that are discussed by Patti in that paragraph should be about equal - showing a “balanced” horse. So if you measure muzzle to poll, using a stick, then that same length should apply to all the other “harmony” measurements. It is very difficult to explain it without a diagram (picture). And we were shown a diagram, but not provided with a “hard copy” of it, so it can’t be included in that article.

And you have to see the diagram to understand where the measurement is - the muzzle to poll is a much longer line then you might thing (it is more like muzzle to 2nd or 3rd vertebrae).[/QUOTE]

So it’s not actually muzzle to poll at all?

I was trying to figure out how elbow to fetlock and stifle to hock could be the same length on a horse who is anything but super downhill…

[Scribbler]

I saw Kristi Wysocki do a short clinic/demo at our local horse expo last year, on evaluating sport horse gaits from the ground. It was a short clinic, clear and easy to understand, and I think accurate, but didn’t really get into the biomechanics to the extent that I would have liked; it was very much a primer on the topic, as was appropriate to the audience (the horsey friend I was with learned some important things that I already knew ).

I have no idea how accurately this article linked here reflects what she said at this clinic, as I do find it a bit mystifying. I can see why an appropriately sized head would make a pretty or harmonious horse, but not why the head should be taken as the measure of everything else. If your horse had an unusually large or small head, this measuring system wouldn’t work.

I am quite interested in biomechanics, and have been trying to “see” hip, stifle, and shoulder angles IRL as well as in diagrams, and found this blog very useful; it is still up and searchable, though no new posts for some time:

http://hoovesblog.com/

Some of the points made in this article, particularly about the relative length of back and front legs, seem to contradict my other information on biomechanics. I can’t find any indepth material on-line authored by Kristi, so can’t really check if this is complete and accurate to what she said, or if the article is missing some points. I’m going to guess the latter, since I had a good impression of her at the clinic I saw.

[joiedevie99]

This is a good book on the subject. I went to a lecture Christian did a few years ago and thought it was very well done.

http://www.amazon.com/Sport-Horse-Conformation-Evaluating-Potential/dp/1570765308

[MysticOakRanch]

[QUOTE=netg;8503555]
So it’s not actually muzzle to poll at all?

I was trying to figure out how elbow to fetlock and stifle to hock could be the same length on a horse who is anything but super downhill…[/QUOTE]

It was described as muzzle to poll, so the writer took accurate notes, but when you looked at the diagram (provided by power point, but not given to anyone who attended), it is a bit lower on the poll then I think everyone is thinking. imagine a line drawn through the mouth and straight back - it will hit about the 2nd vertebrae, and that is the length you then compare to everything else. So it is really more then the length of the head, it includes the upper neck as well. Believe it or not, it more-or-less works.

Much of the info is actually in the book by Christian Schacht, just shown a bit differently.

The point was to try to get people to do a serious review of conformation, not just fall in love with a horse (or a horse’s bloodlines or breeding). And it was really interesting because Kristi said she does not want to know the breeding or the bloodlines until she has evaluated the horse. She had pictures of some lovely horses and everyone was guessing they were fancy Warmbloods - and they weren’t. Included a Friesian cross and a draft cross, and both were very competitive dressage horses!

In our demo live horses, we had 5 warmbloods, a Welsh, an Arab, a Haflinger, a Friesian cross (my mare), a Gypsy (who was showing at PSG). All were successful dressage horses!

I think the article is reasonable for a SHORT summary of a day and a half long symposium!

[Velvet]

And I think it would be nice if an editor had read it for easy comprehension and fixed the problem areas.

[beowulf]

I liked the article and I actually was thinking of starting my own thread where us dressage biddies measured our appropriate or inappropriate mounts - thought it would be fun – I printed out my guy and did all of his measurements – according to Kristi my guy should be a dressage sensation - everything is happy and harmonious!! But he has other opinions :winkgrin:

What I wish the editor elaborated better was the ambiguous terminology - IE “measure from withers to elbow” - what are we measuring, the highest part of the withers, where they technically start in the skeleton, etc?

But what I thought was lacking was the biomechanics - I’m a bit of a hungry scholar - I don’t care for the wheres or the whats - I want to know the whys – the article didn’t really go into depth about the function of each perimeter which is what I sorely wished to know. I love biomechanics, I love figuring out why a particular form translates into a particular function – but her clinic seemed to play it safe.

FWIW I’ve seen many a perfectly conformed horse not function as well as her clinic would suggest.

[Scribbler]

The short Kristi clinic I saw was good for training the eye to see how well the horse moved, both the length of stride and the engagement of the hock, as well as the beats of the stride. We saw several horses, older and younger, trained and not, on the longe line.

I was left wondering after, though, about the influence of training, age, and injury on the horses. I know that my mare moves much better at liberty after several years working on overcoming her sewing-machine trot under saddle.

I also see older horses around me who used to have better gaits (and more classic “dressage” conformation) than my horse started out with, but who are seizing up in the hind end. It is hard to tell from watching if the problem originates in the SI, the stifle, or the hocks. But these are horses whose back limbs appear to move as one piece, if that makes sense; neither the stifle nor the hock bending as much as it should.

So I would have liked some more thoughts from her as to what extent the things she was pointing out were inherent to the horse, and what extent they could be altered. Those are the interesting biomechanical questions, to me.

[csaper58]

[QUOTE=Velvet;8503337]
While I like many of the points in the article: http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/you-can-use-tricks-and-strings-choose-better-dressage-horse I was frustrated by the writer. What the heck is this supposed to mean???

“The harmony line: The horse should display harmony in its proportions from ears to tail. The length from the poll to the end of the muzzle should be the same as the length from the fetlock to the elbow, the chestnut to the ground, the point of the withers to the loin, the withers to the belly, the stifle to the hock, and the hock to the ground.”[/QUOTE]

I did not read the article, but it sounds like the author is trying to work out the ‘Vitruvian’ proportions for the perfect horse.