For those serious about Western Pleasure - a video

[ChasPonyCat]

[QUOTE=RodeoFTW;8635887]
I just don’t understand why people would want to learn pretend dressage. I know that sounds snobby as hell, but ah well. If someone wants to incorporate more classical principals into their western horse, that’s cool and I’m 100% all about that but I think a lot of these people could do very well doing actual dressage instead of hiding behind a western saddle. It seems like a crutch to me.

And it’s not an assumption. I have a background in both kinds of riding. Before I got into an English saddle, I was basically doing this brand new ‘western dressage’ thing for years.[/QUOTE]

So you are basing your judgements of everyone who does a certain discipline solely upon your own experience? Sounds like an assumption to me.

[RodeoFTW]

[QUOTE=ChasPonyCat;8635901]
So you are basing your judgements of everyone who does a certain discipline solely upon your own experience? Sounds like an assumption to me.[/QUOTE]

I’m not allowed to have opinions about stuff based off of my own personal experiences having done it? Is that what you are saying?

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=RodeoFTW;8635816]
My biggest problem with it, too.

Also the soundness issues later in life. The once really nice ‘wp’ horse we have at our barn had to be retired half way through his life because of navicular. No horse should have to live with something like that just for a year or two in the limelight.

I also wish the horses were able to move forward with more purpose and not have such a dead expression in their eyes. It wasn’t until I started riding English (Dressage, huntseat) did I learn how important it was to have a horse that is not only relaxed but also has the desire to be in-front of the leg.

“Some would say the same about western dressage as well.”

Western dressage is for people too afraid to ride actual dressage. Not that I blame them too much. I’ve never fallen off riding western, but I’ve fallen off three times in a dressage saddle, so…[/QUOTE]

One horse you knew that had navicular and happen to be a WP horse and now all WP horses get navicular?

That is not how it works with “navicular”, a word like “cancer”, that means so much that can be wrong in there, not any one thing necessarily.

I know of several AQHA lines that had more than their share of navicular.
For that kind of diagnoses those horses bred like that had, it was inherited and very specific and not dependent on what discipline they were trained and competed in.

As a side note, all of us tend to hold old misconceptions, that is why many of us are reading and participating in the discussions on forums, to learn more.

[RodeoFTW]

[QUOTE=Bluey;8635911]
One horse you knew that had navicular and happen to be a WP horse and now all WP horses get navicular?

That is not how it works with “navicular”, a word like “cancer”, that means so much that can be wrong in there, not any one thing necessarily.

I know of several AQHA lines that had more than their share of navicular.
For that kind of diagnoses those horses bred like that had, it was inherited and very specific and not dependent on what discipline they were trained and competed in.

As a side note, all of us tend to hold old misconceptions, that is why many of us are reading and participating in the discussions on forums, to learn more.[/QUOTE]

Navicular is common in stock horses, as you just said. It’s pretty fair to say that a lot of pleasure-bred horses are predisposed to navicular. And it’s pretty common knowledge that a lot of upper level, young WP horses do not come out of their (very short) careers without some sort of physical issues, the biggest being lameness and arthritis.

He’s not the only wp horse I knew who had it, but thanks for making that quick assumption.

It’s one of the reasons why I’ve lost interest in wp and stock horses in general.

[Aces_N_Eights]

[QUOTE=RodeoFTW;8635926]
Navicular is common in stock horses, as you just said. It’s pretty fair to say that a lot of pleasure-bred horses are predisposed to navicular. And it’s pretty common knowledge that a lot of upper level, young WP horses do not come out of their (very short) careers without some sort of physical issues, the biggest being lameness and arthritis.

He’s not the only wp horse I knew who had it, but thanks for making that quick assumption.

It’s one of the reasons why I’ve lost interest in wp and stock horses in general.[/QUOTE]

Stock horses is a pretty broad term.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=RodeoFTW;8635926]
Navicular is common in stock horses, as you just said. It’s pretty fair to say that a lot of pleasure-bred horses are predisposed to navicular. And it’s pretty common knowledge that a lot of upper level, young WP horses do not come out of their (very short) careers without some sort of physical issues, the biggest being lameness and arthritis.

He’s not the only wp horse I knew who had it, but thanks for making that quick assumption.

It’s one of the reasons why I’ve lost interest in wp and stock horses in general.[/QUOTE]

Okey then, so you don’t have stock horses because you think they are all cripples?

What kind of wonderful and special horses do you have that are all perfect?

We have had many and know of many other stock horses that have been fine into their 20 and some 30, after very long careers working hard, not exactly hot house plants those.

On the other hand, stock horses have a reputation as horses that can take lots of work and are fine, thank you, plus have the disposition to go with it.

We retired one from competition at 25 and he was still sound and happy being ridden.

Ever look at the median age of PRCA horses?
I think last they checked, it was 17, many over 20 were still competing and doing very well.

I think that horses in general do as well as they are raised and trained and managed.

[RodeoFTW]

Oh lord do you get offended easily. I don’t care to hear a whole synposis about your herd, but thanks.

I started on stock horses, showed on stock horses, and decided stock horses weren’t for me. Oh well.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=RodeoFTW;8635978]
Oh lord do you get offended easily. I don’t care to hear a whole synposis about your herd, but thanks.

I started on stock horses, showed on stock horses, and decided stock horses weren’t for me. Oh well. :)[/QUOTE]

You are right there, they are not for everyone.
That is why there are so many types of horses out there, to suit everyone.

[ChasPonyCat]

@RodeoFTW;8635978

Oh lord do you get offended easily. I don’t care to hear a whole synposis about your herd, but thanks.

Once again, a bit rude.

Bluey merely provided examples to the contrary of your example, that’s all. And it’s a little normal for horse people to talk about their horses isn’t it? Isn’t that why we are on a horse forum?

[roseymare]

[QUOTE=Plumcreek;8634912]
My BFF is a major player in Ranch Riding, so I watch a lot of classes. I do not believe it will get dumbed down. Judges are placing the horses who really move out at all gaits, and the transitions are most important, so training, a horse that will listen through fairly intricate patterns, not just a slow reiner, are being rewarded.[/QUOTE]

I think that judges are doing a good job so far of keeping this class honest. I was a bit concerned when the extended walk got to be almost a running walk in some of the big name horses, and then when we saw some sliding stops.
I think it goes back to my other post, we need to allow some variables as to headset and frame, and we are seeing that so far in the Ranch Riding.

[aktill]

Don’t feed the troll folks.

[Plumcreek]

[QUOTE=Aces N Eights;8635722]
The whole idea of the ranch classes in the AQHA is dumbed down. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad the pendulum is swinging the other way, but its for the wrong reasons from my point of view. AQHA has been about the $$$ not bettering the breed. I feel with the coming of the “ranch” classes has been a way for them to cash in on the ranch horse fad. Maybe I am looking at it wrong but I agree with those who said it created a niche for the horses that can’t compete with those super slow western pleasure horses, whether it be correct or not, or the reiners that cant make the cut, whatever. Some would say the same about western dressage as well. Just curious as to how many horses that compete in the ranch horse classes actually are ranch horses and not just go to the occasional branding or ship calves at the neighbors?[/QUOTE]

While quite a few that actually do own a ranch are competing and winning in Ranch Riding, the biggest boon to AQHA/APHA is bringing back the disenfranchised riders/owners who quit breed shows because they disagreed with the bling and direction WP and other rail classes were taking and maybe do not have the horse or ambition to win in today’s reining pen. These riders are having a good time and pay dues and entry fees. That is the point, as the breeding end of the association income stream is less these days.

[Palm_Beach]

[QUOTE=RodeoFTW;8635926]
Navicular is common in stock horses, as you just said. It’s pretty fair to say that a lot of pleasure-bred horses are predisposed to navicular. And it’s pretty common knowledge that a lot of upper level, young WP horses do not come out of their (very short) careers without some sort of physical issues, the biggest being lameness and arthritis.

He’s not the only wp horse I knew who had it, but thanks for making that quick assumption.

It’s one of the reasons why I’ve lost interest in wp and stock horses in general.[/QUOTE]

You’re incorrect.

“Caudal heel pain has been diagnosed in most breeds of horses, but there does appear to be a breed predisposition, with Quarter Horses, Thoroughbreds, and warmbloods being diagnosed with the syndrome more frequently than others. Affected horses tend to be between the ages of seven and 14.”

http://www.thehorse.com/articles/10042/navicular-problems-symptoms-and-treatment

So what did you move to when you ditched the stock breeds???

[ChasPonyCat]

[QUOTE=Palm Beach;8636211]
You’re incorrect.

“Caudal heel pain has been diagnosed in most breeds of horses, but there does appear to be a breed predisposition, with Quarter Horses, Thoroughbreds, and warmbloods being diagnosed with the syndrome more frequently than others. Affected horses tend to be between the ages of seven and 14.”

http://www.thehorse.com/articles/10042/navicular-problems-symptoms-and-treatment

So what did you move to when you ditched the stock breeds???[/QUOTE]

But…but…she gave you that ONE example!

[LittleLegsBigStride]

Oh my, is all of the rudeness and snark really necessary?
Slow horses isn’t why people quit the horse industry. PEOPLE are why people quit the horse industry. Some of you aren’t helping, sorry.

I’ve owned and shown a lot of breeds, but my favorite was a little appy. Second are my current boys, both APHA geldings. One’s a hunter, one is an all around (I call him my western horse with english training). Love them both to death.
The GOOD western pleasure horses that move how a western pleasure horse should (self carriage, slow without losing impulsion, etc) take so much training, muscle, I think it’s incredible. That coming from a HUS/dressage snob.

[RodeoFTW]

[QUOTE=Palm Beach;8636211]
You’re incorrect.

“Caudal heel pain has been diagnosed in most breeds of horses, but there does appear to be a breed predisposition, with Quarter Horses, Thoroughbreds, and warmbloods being diagnosed with the syndrome more frequently than others. Affected horses tend to be between the ages of seven and 14.”

http://www.thehorse.com/articles/10042/navicular-problems-symptoms-and-treatment

So what did you move to when you ditched the stock breeds???[/QUOTE]

So proud of you! You can search on google!

Not sure what you are trying to (or not trying to) prove with this sentence.

I didn’t quit wp with srock horses because they were slow. I quit because a lot of it was unnatural gairs, uncomfortable to watch, and the horses get worn down too fast too young from it.

My favorite horse ever was also an appy but I prefer riding something now with a higher head set.

[Aces_N_Eights]

[QUOTE=Plumcreek;8636093]
While quite a few that actually do own a ranch are competing and winning in Ranch Riding, the biggest boon to AQHA/APHA is bringing back the disenfranchised riders/owners who quit breed shows because they disagreed with the bling and direction WP and other rail classes were taking and maybe do not have the horse or ambition to win in today’s reining pen. These riders are having a good time and pay dues and entry fees. That is the point, as the breeding end of the association income stream is less these days.[/QUOTE]

Just because they own a ranch it doesn’t mean that is how the horse is used on a daily basis. I’ll say it again, don’t get me wrong, I’m glad the pendulum is starting to swing the other way but I really don’t hold a lot faith in the AQHA to keep it true to what it is meant to showcase. Thats one reason I don’t show AQHA. I’d rather show in the stock horse associations where the ranch horse is well, ranch horses and not a Horsemanship class without the bling. And if that’s someone else’s cup of tea, have at it! I just think the name of the class is a misnomer.

[Plumcreek]

The SHOT horses win the AQHA World Shows Ranch Riding doing their usual thing.
I also lived in Reno and showed at Fallon, where many horses did the cutting, then the working hunter (not kidding about this), then the pattern classes, then home to gather cattle for preg checking. It was a great group of horses.

[mvp]

[QUOTE=Plumcreek;8636093]
While quite a few that actually do own a ranch are competing and winning in Ranch Riding, the biggest boon to AQHA/APHA is bringing back the disenfranchised riders/owners who quit breed shows because they disagreed with the bling and direction WP and other rail classes were taking and maybe do not have the horse or ambition to win in today’s reining pen. These riders are having a good time and pay dues and entry fees. That is the point, as the breeding end of the association income stream is less these days.[/QUOTE]

The AQHA has always capitalized on the really smart business strategy of lowering or moving the bar so that anyone who wanted to show but didn’t like the current divisions offered could find a place to pay 'n play. You can be old, crippled, or scared… or not even wanting to ride… and there will be an arena in which you can spend a lot of money. Just bring your money. And as our population ages, I think more and more trainers are making room for the only people who have any of it left: The rich retirees (and the devoted families who will spend on their kids having a fun and wholesome childhood with horses).

I wouldn’t get too upset about the “back to basics” ranch horse movement, or the advent of WD. It’s (once again) the AQHA skillfully rolling out the welcome mat for anyone who complains about the elitism or artificiality of the established divisions. Again, all the AQHA has to do is make these folks feel welcome.

But the AQHA has a tried-and-true recipe for capturing the interest of people who want to ride but don’t want to be part of anything that seems elitist. This has been true going way back into the 1980s and 1990s.

[mvp]

[QUOTE=aktill;8630393]
>These horses have been bred to go slow and they do so naturally.

They do so SELECTIVELY, based off their breeding. People have used breeding to create a pattern.

Just because we can doesn’t mean we should.

There are foals that come out like this:
http://www.hagyard.com/custdocs/Angular%20Limb%20Deformities.pdf

…but few would argue that since these things are occurring naturally, so to speak, that these animals should stay that way.[/QUOTE]

I see two people have liked this post.

You don’t really mean to conflate selective breeding for slow movement and congenital defects, to you? Clearly, those don’t have the same cause at least so far as breeders’ intentions go.

Be critical, but be fair in that. Otherwise, why take the complaint seriously?