Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

In a message dated 3/21/2003 12:13:46 PM Pacific Standard Time, reshan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

> I find that relatively meaningless, considering what I see winning in the 
> show ring.
> All that a high percentage of champions means is that a high percentage of 
> foals were shown successfully.
> And that's only useful if you're interested in breeding a horse suitable 
> for the show ring. It won't tell you a lot about their potential as 
> endurance sires, or field hunters,  or working ranch horses.


It won't even tell you too much about their prospects as a show horse (generally indicating halter horse), since a tremendous part of a successful campaign of a show horse is who is at the shank or in the saddle. The fact is that unless and until trainers/judges wear paper bags over their heads and the judge/trainer at the show does not knwo who is who - horses, owners and riders/handlers - the who is who of trainer/judges will have a huge impact. Some exceptionally nice horses never made it to the top because their owners either could not afford thee high costs of the Flavor of the season trainers, and/or could not stomach the abuse in the show industry. Conversely, some fairly trashy horses have won multitudes of "championships - if only they had the right handler, superb turnout, exotic head, "hooky" neck "trotty" movement, flat topline....

In the end a horse is only as good as its genetics, training, management and in the show ring...its wallet.
San (who has been there and done too much of that)