This message is from: "ruth bushnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Pat Writes: > This is a good example of a composite score that needs to be looked > at the way the evaluation system was meant to be. In more detail. > Pat Holland
You are so right Pat, a composite total high blue ribbon number is no guarantee for THE perfect horse anyhow. (Particularly not for breeding, if that horse has a bloodline that has been excessively inbred in preceding generations.) But this topic reminded me of a related observation of mine, regards evaluated horses and their piecemeal scoring; where the horse is fragmentally broken down into graded segments, much like a butcher's beef chart for choice cuts, hah! The hindleg bracket might be graded high, the frontleg category might score well too, but the two legs might not necessarily match well, (high butt) ..or they might be disproportionately long for the torso, ratio-wise--I have seen notable examples of this, yet they score high! Many breeds have comparative leg-torso ratio parameters, we must not? I think anyone who has been in horses for quite some time and developed an eye for conformation, will agree that it is the overall first glance that captures the harmonious unison of a good physical specimen. I realize the evaluation score sheet has a "balance and harmony" bracket under type, but the score is insignificantly minimal and should have far more consideration in the composite score. Best body parts are important, but only as important as they match, and are well assembled. I could go on about the lack of a temperament score also, but realize that no breed judging system is perfect and that it is at least better than nothing. Ruthie, nw mt US The FjordHorse List archives can be found at: http://tinyurl.com/rcepw
