Conformation pictures for idiots

[my miss storm cat]

I was hoping that maybe a few of you could tell me about conformation pictures.....

I know absolutely nothing about them.

What do you look for? What is the first thing you notice? Is there a deal-breaker?

Obviously there are vast differences between say Pins and Southern Image. If i weren't familiar with these names though... if i couldn't see the fee and asked you to help me choose a stallion what is it you'd tell me?

Is there anything that stands out about say... Hat Trick? What about Flashy Bull?

Hat Trick
http://www.gainesway.com/horses/hat-trick-2783.html

Southern Image
http://www.ranchosanmiguel.net/southern-image.shtml

Pins
http://www.waikatostud.co.nz/pins---conformation

Flashy Bull
http://www.airdriestud.com/flashy_bu...s&record=video

Can you try to explain what it is you see (sans sarcasm - although i know it might be tempting)?

Thanks in advance!

[trackrat59]

Great topic Ms. Cat. Looking forward to learning something here.

[Sightseek]

I don't think you can judge a horse by photo -- particularly with race horses you want to see how they move and their character.

The TOBA has an informative series on conformation.
http://www.toba.org/owner-education/conformation.aspx

After awhile most people form preferences and have ideals in the kind of runner they are looking for. For example, I don't like the light-frameness of Songandaprayers and am particular about necks, pasterns and feet. You have to approach a horse with a goal in mind too -- are you looking for a win early 2 yo, a Classic horse, a turf horse, etc.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

I don't think you can judge a horse by photo -- particularly with race horses you want to see how they move, etc.

Not to mention if they crossfire or not...

[my miss storm cat]

Originally Posted by trackrat59

Great topic Ms. Cat. Looking forward to learning something here.

We shall learn together.

Originally Posted by Kasept

Not to mention if they crossfire or not...

* * *

This is from the "sideview" part of the link you posted, Sightseek...

Head - The head should be broad enough to permit adequate air passage. Generally, the distance from the back of the jaw to where the head ties into the neck should be about the size of a fist. Nostrils should be of adequate size. People refer to an "attractive" head. That usually means the head is short, with well-set ears; has large bold eyes, a short distance from eye to muzzle, large nostrils and a refined muzzle with a shallow mouth. In general, there is no physiological benefit to the horse having an "attractive" head. An "ugly" head functions similarly to an attractive head.

Off the top of your (attractive) head can you think of an example either way?

[Danzig]

always thought vicar had a nice, attractive head. just looked him up on the stallion register to see if they still had a pic of him since he went overseas. they do not.

[Sightseek]

Just a quick glance at WinStar's line-up - Hold Me Back vs. some of their other stallions such as Bellamy Road ( ! ) Super Saver, Distorted Humor etc.

http://www.winstarfarm.com/horses/ho...back-2016.html

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by Danzig

always thought vicar had a nice, attractive head. just looked him up on the stallion register to see if they still had a pic of him since he went overseas. they do not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a98yEEwf3Tk

great soundtrack. . .

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a98yEEwf3Tk

great soundtrack. . .

thanks for posting that!

[my miss storm cat]

Thanks for the examples, guys (... and the really awesome music).

Originally Posted by Cardus

Self-deprecating thread title.

I refuse to have a problem with you. If this were any other week I'd post a smartass comment but I've had enough.

Sorry you didn't like my title (again) and yeah... it was actually truthful because I know absolutely nothing looking at these things.

You can say whatever you want to me and I will not fight back. I don't want to fight with you.

If you'd like to tell me something about conformation that would be great.

If not, fine.

[Riot]

Most stallions are only going to have minor, picky conformation flaws (from perfection) that are overcome by their race record, but you consider when breeding to your mare to them.

"The faster they run, the prettier they get"

Bloodhorse has an excellent small basic conformation book for yearling sales. If you go on the internet, there are lots of equine conformation sites that have good pictures. You can see pics about obvious things like over at knees, toed out, etc. and you can indeed see that type of thing in the paddock esp. with lower end horses.

Go watch the walking videos of the stallions advertised on the farm websites - that will help show you good walks.

You really only develop your eye on live animals, but you can certainly learn the basics from a book and photos.

Seabiscut was noticably "over at the knee". Go find a picture of him?

[Riot]

Here's the three-part Bloodhorse series where different bloodstock agents and trainers look at pictures of yearlings, and come up with completely different interpretations of their physical appearance But it is helpful, it does have different people referring to the same picture and giving an opinion.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...g-conformation

http://www.bloodhorse.com/yearling_c...on_pt_one.html

[Antitrust32]

i don't know a whole lot but make sure they have a good shoulder (I believe 45% is what to look for) and have straight legs. My friend John Perrotta likes the small, compact look on race horses. He knows a hell of a lot more than I do!

[my miss storm cat]

Thanks for the links and comments!

[Linny]

Based purely on conformation, I would prefer Pins and Hat Trick from the original four posted. Hat Trick has a nice head (he appears to be blinking or squinting in the pic and it makes him look dull.) and a long neck, providing balance. His shoulder os good and his legs don't show anything glaringly wrong. In the pic his left front foot looks odd, almost like it was photoshopped.

Pins is a different type. He's more compact, with a thicker, lower set neck and flatter back but he too appears correct. He has a pretty "typey" head but some might say it's almost feminine. It could just be the photo, but he appears to stand wider up front that Hat Trick.


You really cannot assess conformation fully from photos but you can get a general idea of how a horse is put together. A short straight shoulder usually produces a more stilted stride up front, and low set knees and hocks generally result in sounder lower limbs. Horses that appear balanced from front to back usually will have the more efficient way of going though it doesn't make them fast. From WinStar, Bellamy Road is stunning as is Summer Bird. I saw both up close when they were running and was impressed.) Col. John is also a nice looking horse. There is nothing about him that is WOW, but everything looks even and balanced.
When looking at young stallions you have to keep in mind than horses being let down post racing often go through a very homely stage. They lose muscle tone earned in training, but haven't filled out with the cresty neck or rib cage of a mature stallion. Super Saver appears to look a bit awkward, and he was a nice looking colt when I saw him last summer. I never got a good look at Hold Me Back but he doesn't look like much in that pic. I would hope that he might fill out and have a new pic by this time next year.

I like the "appearance videos" that the Korean farm did of Vicar. It's nice to see his action on get a bit of an idea of her disposition. The head on jog while he's free shows that his action is quite straight. Vicar was always a very handsome horse. One of my friends owns a son of his and looks very much like his sire.

[NoChanceToDance]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

I don't think you can judge a horse by photo -- particularly with race horses you want to see how they move and their character.

The TOBA has an informative series on conformation.
http://www.toba.org/owner-education/conformation.aspx

After awhile most people form preferences and have ideals in the kind of runner they are looking for. For example, I don't like the light-frameness of Songandaprayers and am particular about necks, pasterns and feet. You have to approach a horse with a goal in mind too -- are you looking for a win early 2 yo, a Classic horse, a turf horse, etc.

Sightseek has it exactly right.

Some people's 'definite no' might actually be somebody elses' 'yes please'. It really depends on what type of horse you are looking for, and the long term plan for him/her.

I always find that the most interesting conformation 'defect' is being back of the knee. Personally I do not like it, and won't go near a yearling who is back of it's knee. However, one of the best racehorses and sires (danehill) was infact back of his knees and often threw that onto his progeny, and it hasn't stop them either.

You will often find that certain sire lines will throw certain issues. Storm Cat being one of the best examples. He and most of his sire sons are quite offset (usually in their near fore, correct me if I'm wrong). Now in the early days this would have put people off, but once he and his progeny could run and run fast even with those knees, people decided to pay less attention to this conformation defect.

Then you come to simple things like quality, and if the horse is good looking and this more or less comes down to opinion. For example, I believe a horse like Super Saver is a stunning looking horse, with heaps of quality.

Like Sightseek I'm not a fan of light framed horses, or horses who lack bone.

I'm more forgiving with horses who have long pasterns, especially in europe where they race on a more forgiving surface. However, i'm a little more harsh on long pasterns in both North America and Australia. The only problem being, that these horses are often exceptional walkers - a personal must.

The big thing for me is feet. "no feet, no horse" beiing one of the most important phrases to remember. I spend a lot of time looking at the feet when inspecting yearlings.

It's almost impossible to find a 100% correct horse these days, whether that's because of how we are breeding or whether it's because we are becoming more criticial on conformation, I'm not sure.

[Danzig]

i know what you mean about likes and dislikes. i personally don't like to see high withers on a horse...another thing i don't like is when the rear is higher than the withers-i've seen horses were their hind end was substantially higher. not sure if either has anything to do with running ability-just a personal quirk of mine. i like a smooth transition from neck to withers and then to the rear-with the withers and high point of the back end on level.
or is that just plain wrong??
i see bloodhorse has a conformation video for sale....anyone buy it yet? is it a good one?


stonesider is one i like:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/stallion-r...50&origin=link






eskenderaya is an example of a horse with a higher rear than withers

http://www.bloodhorse.com/stallion-r...?refno=8000094


now, here's hard spun:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/stallion-r...63&origin=link

thoughts?

like the looks of corinthian:
http://www.bloodhorse.com/stallion-r...35&origin=link


but of course you can't get a great feel for the legs, since you can't get a head on and from behind view....