>>> Is there any kind of advantage in her small stature and the fact that she >>> is closer >>> to the ground and weighs less than, for instance, my friend's 15.3 h >>> Appaloosa?
Before I got Sina, the horses I mainly rode were 16.2H Sundance, 16.1H Joe, and 14.1H Holly. I also rode 15.3H Mac. All of these are fairly substantial boned horses - Sundance and Mac were tanks. None of these were/are silly or skittish, all were what most would consider good trail horses, so I don't think that personality factors have too much to do with my feelings about these horses. I like/liked all of these horses a lot. I can't define the difference, but I have always had the feeling on the Icelandic's that they are Sherman tanks calmly rolling through whatever I point them to. It's not that the others weren't reasonably surefooted, it's just that the Icelandic's took surefootedness to another level. Maybe it's their center of gravities being lower. Maybe it's their calmness, coupled with the low center of gravity. Whatever it is, I don't know how many times I've gotten that same comment from people who have ridden here on our horses who were used to big horses. When I say this though, remember that all of my Icelandic's came here with minimal training. Most were unstarted or barely greenbroke, and thus were started not so differently from the other-breed horses we've had. Only one of ours was started with what might be considered show-type riding, and he wasn't ridden that way for very long, and he had some time to "chill" before we pushed him too hard on the trail. I don't necessarily think I'd feel that way about the breed if I had to ride some of the trained-to-be-hot Icelandic's I've seen. Karen Thomas, NC
