More accurate for nd1 would be “not true dun” and nd2 would be “not dun at all.”
ND1 (and ND2) make a lot more sense if you think in the historical context of horses. It’s believed the first horses were all bay dun (which is EEAADD). Well somewhere along the line, there was a mutation in a D, resulting in something non-dun. With our current knowledge, they have been able to determine there is nd1 which can cause some primitives (but not in the exact same way D does) and nd2 which does not show primitives. We should be glad nd1 was not named after whoever the heck discovered it!
Grulla is dun on a black base. Red dun is dun on a red base. Dun or bay dun is dun on a bay base. So I believe your horse is grulla as he is black, not bay, with dun.
now that the dust has settled on this auction i’m taking a bit of time to inhale some of all-y’alls structural critiques.
About this guy, when i draw lines (bottom photo) i get something different than yours (top)
Not sure what you’re seeing that’s different. I still see a horse whose shoulder does not match the rest of his body and I still don’t like his neck. Ignore the lines on the top and bottom of my picture. Those weren’t meant to mean anything. I also don’t know what your link arrows are referring to.
I also don’t think that using the conformation guide from the AQHA is a great comparison for judging functional conformation of dressage horses. I would not choose the breed ideal quarter horse for my dressage prospect. If you want a working ranch horse, then my opinion of this guy is different.
what i am seeing i that his front 1/3 takes up a bigger swath than you do.
QH eg is the first one i found with thirds drawn. A big difference is i see that this particular photo is at an angle…foreshortened where front is further away from camera…which makes rear look larger comparatively. I’m seeing a more equally balanced horse.
You can draw lines all you want but the big question is " How trainable is this horse?" And how does he carry himself and use his body when he is not in an enclosure with very deep sand? His neck is set on pretty low to be ideal which will tip him on his forehand.
Now that I said that there is a young lady in my area that has taken a mustang mare that didn’t have ideal conformation and has taken her to 3rd ( not sure how good the changes are). She did not initially gentle the horse but has done all the dressage training. The horse’s appearance has changed a great deal with correct work and you would not think it is the same horse. But obviously the horse was very trainable and she is a very talented rider. Not sure how competitive the horse is but still pretty eye opening about what a good rider can do.
Yes, the picture could be misleading. In your picture the lines are still uneven. But in the videos of him moving, I still see what the picture indicates, which is a horse with a short, upright shoulder, a thick neck, and a weak coupling. I don’t think this makes him a bad horse at all and he might defy biomechanics like lots of other horses do. My point was only that if we are judging functional conformation for specifically dressage, he’s not my pick but there’s also no accounting for taste.
I’ve seen necks in particular transform. Ewenecks becoming lovely arching glories. Can’t take a short neck and make it longer, but you can get them to carry it gracefully. Necks and butts seem to be the most…fungible.
my eye was on his legs …that was my draw. And he did have a way of carrying himself that attracted. I see his movement as something lovely. So…please, educate me.
We were having a discussion about conformation specifically. Trainability is huge. From what I’ve heard about mustangs, the trainability is hit or miss. But I do believe eightpondfarm will love him regardless.
I just went back to look at those three grey horses you posted together, without looking at my original comments on the three of them. I made a few notes on each of them and then compared to what I said beore-- my opinion has not changed even a little, lol.
I see a horse with a choppy-er stride in front (as expected with a steep shoulder and where his neck is) and who doesn’t quite track up behind, or his hind leg lands behind the hoofprint on the same side in the trot. I think this is a contributor to his neck. To me this is one of three things:
He’s in deep sand.
His hind leg angles are relatively straight, too, so he naturally doesn’t bring the hind leg under as far, or he might be compensating for the fact that his front feet don’t “get out of the way” as much.
Something is NQR up high in his hind end. He is not obviously lame but a little short in both hinds. Could be hips or sacral area. Could also be that his feet aren’t balanced.
Of those three grey horses you posted together, 8469 is the most balanced overall, though he is a little short behind too. He never really moves out in the video, though, so it’s hard to tell. 8547 had the nicest hindleg.
Of course I’m being nitpicky for the sake of discussion, and it’s a bit unfair to judge these guys like a sale ad on Facebook or the like. I also absolutely have my own limitations in judging videos, too. I’m horse shopping right now and find it nearly impossible to predict a horse’s natural movement when the video is the horse under saddle with an unbalanced rider.
(Unrelated note: I’ve started asking people who is riding in the video if I’m really interested in the horse-- I had one that didn’t look so good but the seller said the trainer loved the horse’s gaits. I thought it might be rider error. The person said the trainer was riding in the video. Ain’t no way. This was a very tolerant horse. I passed.)
and looks like i didn’t buy a horse but rather a goat (looks kinda goaty in this shot). There are a ton of pics of both Avatar and Avocet…esp Avocet! But poor Quigley…(Silkypants)? nah. a dark bay (or ‘black’) just doesn’t grab a photographer’s eye as much.
Well, no question that he’s able to get off his forehand when he feels inclined to do so.
I’m reasonably certain that he won’t make a great upper-level horse but I don’t see any reason why he can’t be a perfectly competent lower-level horse, assuming he decides that he’s into the whole riding thing.
I guess dun is common in that group, as the mare on the left is a red dun. You can see her dorsal and the peachy dilution to her red coat.
Novel markings on the bay foal (though that one does not seem to be dun). I wonder if someday they will find a genetic reason for occlusion spots in blazes - was the pinto you bid on who had a similar funky blaze from this HMA as well?
People occasionally ask me what colour my mare is, and I don’t have a good answer. She looks bay (so if someone had to catch her, you could say, “the bright bay mare with the long mane and grey rug”). But technically, she’s not bay? But not dun? Not true dun?
Your mare is definitely bay, with primitives. If she was mine, I would probably jokingly call her a bay trying to be dun. But if someone asks about the dorsal, you can tell them she’s nd1 or not true dun.
All horses have a base coat of either bay, black or red. Every other color (including grey!) comes from something (or several somethings) being added to that base color.
there were a ton of grays in this HMA. And many pintos.
In this group, an unrelated stallion on left. Half brother to Avatar is the foal, next is Avatar, and black is dam to both pinto foal and my dunboy
No they won’t fight this seriously, they’re gelded. And in a year they probably won’t fight at all. I did not adopt/buy the gray, nor any of the grays i was looking at. And, i’m not exactly sure how many i’m getting. I have paid for four, and there are these two extras …older fellas that are not trainable that i’ve agreed to give a home to… but things like this are always iffy. People might get a second-wind and keep on going with them…Which is fine by me. Either way is ok about those two. One is a pinto (i’ve never had a pinto, always kinda avoided them) and the other one is an ugly beast.
