That steroid-look on a horse is not appealing to me in the least.
That is the classic Impressive look.
Being for the most part a QH person, we have two foundation QHs - no Impressive in the lineage. This should have been stopped years ago and the stopping of all breeding of Impressive’s line. But that look is what the halter classes wanted.
[QUOTE=JB;3219173]
You started this on the other HYPP thread. What does you horse’s success have to do with being N/H? Nothing. It only shows that a N/H horse can be a very successful horse, which NOBODY here is arguing. I truly hope your horse lives to be 40 years old without a single episode. They are are not all that lucky.[/QUOTE]
:o
Sorry i was bragging on my guy - my apologies:(
I know you were, and I was not intending to take away from that in the least. Everyone should have as much pride in their horse’s accomplishments as you do 
I just didn’t see the relevance, and I apologize for having dragged some baggage over from that other thread.
Does anyone know what N/? means? I have seen this in a few pedigrees.
I means 1 parent was known to be NN, but the status of the other is unknown. It also means the individual hasn’t been tested, so could be N/N or N/H
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
