A meaningful factually correct contribution to the conversation that does not bash one group or the other with incorrect information. :yes:
[QUOTE=Plumcreek;8637262]
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.[/QUOTE]
I used to show at those shows in Fallon when we lived on that side of the state, definitely all-arounders! However then there weren’t any cattle classes offered you had to go over to Stix’s feedlot if you wanted to cut.
[QUOTE=mvp;8637313]
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?[/QUOTE]
The point I was addressing was that it was okay for these horses to move the way they do because it was “natural” (ie, they were born like this). Horses also get born with birth defects, those are also “natural”.
“Natural” <> “good”
Just wandered over here out of curiosity. I will say that the OP video and another of the Sr Western Pleasure class to me show a good trend from the barely-moving, peanut-roller style. May not be my cuppa, but these horses look much more comfortable and pleasant than in the past.
[QUOTE=ezduzit;8629562]
This is a winning ride at Congress. I just can’t muster much enthusiasm for it. The lope is near the 7 minute mark.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yD7ITFkrnB8[/QUOTE]
Belatedy noting that the horses in this video are two years old. I personally lobbied for two year olds to not be required to go the same speed as aged horses - all gaits should be ‘slightly extended’. but that went nowhere fast with the powers at AQHA convention. No other discipline judges young prospect classes under the exact same criteria as aged horses - even green trail and western riding horses have an easier pattern in AQHA.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLuejUCg5AI
I personally love Zips Chocolate Chip , the video shows him winning the 1988 congress and I so wish it could go back to that
[QUOTE=Burbank;8640213]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLuejUCg5AI
I personally love Zips Chocolate Chip , the video shows him winning the 1988 congress and I so wish it could go back to that[/QUOTE]
I liked that lope so much better than what you see today. Would have liked to see a bit more forward at the jog.
Lovely at liberty.
[QUOTE=Burbank;8640213]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLuejUCg5AI
I personally love Zips Chocolate Chip , the video shows him winning the 1988 congress and I so wish it could go back to that[/QUOTE]
My faith would be restored if wp went back to being like this.
And I agree about a more forward moving jog.
gotta say, I like his jog, you can ask for an extended jog but a nice easy wp jog is comfy
[QUOTE=aktill;8638289]
The point I was addressing was that it was okay for these horses to move the way they do because it was “natural” (ie, they were born like this). Horses also get born with birth defects, those are also “natural”.
“Natural” <> “good”[/QUOTE]
With all due respect, you still miss the point: To the extent that slow-legged horses is “natural” (you don’t have to train them to do it) and bred into them, that “naturalness” is the result of selection for the trait.
The reason the distinction between selected-for traits and birth defects matter is because the AQHA is an organization dedicated to selective breeding. Their shows, standards and divisions are set up to reward selective breeding toward this or that goal. And, as someone closer to that world explained earlier, there are judges who want the bar kept that high for slow-moving WP horses, precisely because they want to maintain that selection goal.
Those folks have a point: If you lower the performance standard so as to make it accomplishable by more horses, you effectively are co-signing an less rigorous program of selective breeding. After all, more horses with (arguably worse genes for slow movement) are winning and thus becoming desireable breeding stock.
A similar argument could be made for the modern, WP-like show hunters: Why can’t we lower the bar so that winning horses are allowed to be “realistically” expressive? Rewarding only the robotic horse who lopes along while powering off the ground over a fence is making everyone else with lesser (or realistic?) horses resort to drugging and such.
Those who buy and train the few horses who can get the job done without drugs, of course, don’t want the standard lowered. To the extent that those lovely winning horses are that way because someone has trained them really well, I see their point. And I say this as someone who has made some nice hunters and really, really likes the job of teaching an animal to keep his mind soft and tractable even at speed. I want that kind of training to be rewarded.***
*** This is not to say that I think most horses that I could afford have the winning combination of mind and body that are required, even before I put in the time and money to train it. So I don’t show in that division anymore; the performance standard is too high for me to afford, if I want to be competitive.
But that doesn’t mean that the argument for keeping a standard high isn’t valid for those who can afford it. And it really means that keeping the bar high for a form of showing that’s in service of breeders-- as the AQHA is and the USEF is not-- requires the distinction between bad birth defects and desired inbred traits created though the arduous and expensive process of selective breeding.
[QUOTE=aktill;8638289]
The point I was addressing was that it was okay for these horses to move the way they do because it was “natural” (ie, they were born like this). Horses also get born with birth defects, those are also “natural”.
“Natural” <> “good”[/QUOTE]
With all due respect, you still miss the point: To the extent that slow-legged horses is “natural” (you don’t have to train them to do it) and bred into them, that “naturalness” is the result of selection for the trait.
The reason the distinction between selected-for traits and birth defects matter is because the AQHA is an organization dedicated to selective breeding. Their shows, standards and divisions are set up to reward selective breeding toward this or that goal. And, as someone closer to that world explained earlier, there are judges who want the bar kept that high for slow-moving WP horses, precisely because they want to maintain that selection goal.
Those folks have a point: If you lower the performance standard so as to make it accomplishable by more horses, you effectively are co-signing an less rigorous program of selective breeding. After all, more horses with (arguably worse genes for slow movement) are winning and thus becoming desireable breeding stock.
A similar argument could be made for the modern, WP-like show hunters: Why can’t we lower the bar so that winning horses are allowed to be “realistically” expressive? Rewarding only the robotic horse who lopes along while powering off the ground over a fence is making everyone else with lesser (or realistic?) horses resort to drugging and such.
Those who buy and train the few horses who can get the job done without drugs, of course, don’t want the standard lowered. To the extent that those lovely winning horses are that way because someone has trained them really well, I see their point. And I say this as someone who has made some nice hunters and really, really likes the job of teaching an animal to keep his mind soft and tractable even at speed. I want that kind of training to be rewarded.***
*** This is not to say that I think most horses that I could afford have the winning combination of mind and body that are required, even before I put in the time and money to train it. So I don’t show in that division anymore; the performance standard is too high for me to afford, if I want to be competitive.
But that doesn’t mean that the argument for keeping a standard high isn’t valid for those who can afford it. And it really means that keeping the bar high for a form of showing that’s in service of breeders-- as the AQHA is and the USEF is not-- requires the distinction between bad birth defects and desired inbred traits created though the arduous and expensive process of selective breeding.
[QUOTE=Burbank;8640213]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLuejUCg5AI
I personally love Zips Chocolate Chip , the video shows him winning the 1988 congress and I so wish it could go back to that[/QUOTE]
Not here to bash him, but to marvel a bit: He’s so down hill! And yet he can offer that slow canter? How does he do that? I rarely get to see one built like this at liberty, so that’s instructive for me. Thanks for posting the video.
With the same respect, you’re missing my point; namely that the end result is fundamentally pathological.
Your point is predicated on the underlying assumption that it’s okay that the horse ends up moving like the current show winners do as long as it wasn’t accomplished using force.
My basis of discussion starts with the end result being not okay whether it’s accomplished via training or breeding. My central theme is as stated - that it’s not okay for a horse to move this way no matter the cause, and that it doesn’t suddenly become okay because it’s the horse’s default way of going.
The discussion around how difficult it is shares the same theme, and same objection from my end - it’s besides the point how hard it is to accomplish this way of going, since degree of difficulty is not the objection.
WP in it’s current form is either something you think is okay or not.
The difference between 1988 and now isn’t restricted to just WP either. Last weekend someone posted in the H/J forum a youtube video they had stumbled upon of the 1988 (ish?) AQHA World jump off, which included small clips from other english events. The HUS horses were moving out way more than they currently are. I am thinking both the english and western events followed a similar trajectory, which is not surprising considering the amount of people who show AQHA that do both events with one horse.
[QUOTE=Burbank;8640213]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLuejUCg5AI
I personally love Zips Chocolate Chip , the video shows him winning the 1988 congress and I so wish it could go back to that[/QUOTE]
I have one, love her! She lopes just like that. I wouldn’t change a thing about her.
