ok, just a question i pose to you all. A friend is getting a new horse. He is a very good boy. he has a back that i would consider long. His stride is of course, longer than my horse. i have a shorter backed horse. he has a small choppy stride, but i grew up on horses like him, so i sort of prefer my short backed horse. Of course, a normal, perfect conformation is ideal, but if you cannot have that, which do you prefer and why?
Short because they tend to have an easier time engageing saying that my new boy is a little long lol. But he was the right horse and thatās what matters most
Short backed horses are usually more athletic, more adjustable, and a bit stronger than the long-backed horses.
Long-backed horses sometimes have a harder time getting lead changes and collecting.
I have one of each.
2 Likes
^^Agreed^^:yes:
I grew up with old style Morgans so I love me a close coupled horse with a short, strong back. A good loin makes me swoon.
I see a lot of ginormous horses at the dressage shows that are so long they make me think of an articulated tractor. I saw one last week that could have worn two saddles. I guess they can bend better? But wouldnāt they also break down?
I really donāt know what I am talking about, I just know which ones I prefer to look at.
3 Likes
Alternatively, longer-backed horses often have more elasticity and range in their gaits and usually have better form over fences. Itās not really desirable to have a dressage horse or jumper with a short back. Ideal back length is all relative to the horseās use.
Interesting article here:
http://www.schleese.com/documents/FUNCTIONAL%20ANATOMY%20OF%20THE%20HORSE.pdf
4 Likes
well, having met a family horse (as in so long you could comfortably seat for on his back) blowing away the competitionā¦
The short horse tends to give you false collectionā¦
and the collection/changes thing should probably read āthe rider has a harder time collecting and getting changeā
[QUOTE=Texarkana;6460291]
Alternatively, longer-backed horses often have more elasticity and range in their gaits and usually have better form over fences. Itās not really desirable to have a dressage horse or jumper with a short back. Ideal back length is all relative to the horseās use.
Interesting article here:
http://www.schleese.com/documents/FUNCTIONAL%20ANATOMY%20OF%20THE%20HORSE.pdf[/QUOTE]
Agree. My mare had a longer than ideal back and she had more suspension in her gallop than I had ever rode. She had a big stride and didnāt interfere like the short coupled gelding. I had to use bell boots on him.
I prefer shorter backs, and will consider a horse with a very short back, but would absolutely rule out a horse with a very long back. Thereās a middle range, though, and from shorter to longer within that middle range Iām ok with any.
A shorter back is harder to get supple, itās harder to have the horse moving easily and under itself nicely. I think itās also often harder to sit the trot on a big mover with a short back, as you get more movement caused by their haunches than a longer backed horse would give you in addition to the rest of the movement you get with a bigger mover.
1 Like
What do you want to do with the horse? The answer to that question will lead you in the right direction to look at conformational choices.
G.
4 Likes
I had a very long-backed gelding (my trainer called him a family ride) that was a fantastic jumper. Yes, the dressage was a bit more challenging for him, but we still scored respectably (mid-30s even at Prelim), and his jump more than made up for it : )
I have one of each. Well, OK, my mare probably leans a little bit more towards āaverageā than short. Sheās actually pretty well-proportioned. That being said, she is a MUCH tougher ride than my gelding, who is long backed. She is much harder to get round and harder to bend, but when she gets there, she is cute as a bug and can really move out. I agree that it is also easier for her to get the lead changes than it is for my other horse.
As for my gelding, he might not look like much when youāre just riding around on a loose rein (heās kind of lanky), but when heās put-together, round, and suppple, he looks lovely. Heās a much less complicated horse and a far easier ride. Naturally, heās a pretty decent moverā¦he has, unfortunately, had some poor training in the past that tried to teach him NOT to move out and use himself correctly. Teaching him to unlock himself has been a big part of our training.
Because of his long back, I find myself being very careful with how I manage him. We have hay racks at my barn, but I prefer his hay to be fed to him on the ground, or in a Nibble Net hung chest high. If he hadnāt been starved at one point and wasnāt such a vacuum cleaner, all his hay would go on the ground to help ensure that heās constantly stretching over his back when he eats. Additionally, his grain gets fed to him in a rubber pan on the floor of his stall. Because he likes to eat a lot and is a bigger horse, watching his weight is alo really important. Iām cognizant that too much weight on him can be bad for his back, so I monitor his food intake pretty closely. I also try to get regular massage work done on him, regularly check his back for any soreness, do belly lifts before and after our rides, back him up in hand before and after our rides, and do lots of carrot stretches. Anything to try and get him stretching those muscles and to help get his back stronger.
2 Likes
thanks everyone, this is so interesting. This horse will be a trail horse and do some light ring work and low jumps, but nothing major. i was just curious as to how you all feel about the difference.
I have both and I can now authoritatively say that neither is better. Each has its pros and cons and both can have problems. So there you go.
3 Likes
I think itās less about the length of the back than it is about the length/strength of the loin area as it connects to the hip.
I like that area to be relatively short and very strong, regardless of the length of the back.
1 Like
[QUOTE=caffeinated;6460923]
I think itās less about the length of the back than it is about the length/strength of the loin area as it connects to the hip.
I like that area to be relatively short and very strong, regardless of the length of the back.[/QUOTE]
:yes: If I see that little dip at the loin on a long backed horse denoting weakness, I wonāt consider him/her. Had one like it and horse was very high maintenance keeping her comfortable, her back was always an issue. My current gelding is short backed and still sound and as strong as an ox at his advanced age of 25.
1 Like
Agree with caffeinated. A horse with a longer back and strong loin (which depends on the placement of the lumbar-sacral joint) will do better than a horse with a shorter back and weaker loin.
I disagree that a longer-backed horse will necessarily have more range in its gaits than a shorter-backed one. Along with Loin strength, the shoulder angle has a lot to do with how good a horseās gaits are.
1 Like
Only answer is āit dependsā. What discipline? I would rather have a longer backed horse as a jumper and a shorter backed one for dressage.
Does the long backed horse have a good loin connection? I would not pass him over. Long back plus poor loin connection? Pass.
For dressage, if you get the longer backed horse connected and collected enjoy it because you worked hard for it. Does the short backed horse feel like he is working correctly? Be sure about that because it can be deceptive.
Potential broodmare? Shorter backed ones can have problems but again you donāt want to pass on a long back that is poorly coupled.
So really, as usual, the answer is āit dependsā 
Digging this gem out from my 4-H judging training 20+ years ago - we were taught to āTube the Cube.ā
Translation was, if you are faced with an overly long backed horse and an overly short backed horse, choose the long back.
Just thought it was a fun tidbit to share. Amazing what sticks in your mind decades later.
We had some running horses with very short backs.
We didnāt think they ran up to their potential because of the too short backs.
We had others with too long backs that still ran as they should have, other than a bit longer back.
Now, any real extreme I would say is not good, but I too am in the too long more horses will be more useful than too short.
What gives you a too short horse?
Some times, crossing two horses with very different conformation types.
What produces a too long horse?
That I donāt know, have seen all kinds of lines crossed all kinds of ways produce the occasionally too long horse.
