Dear John and All,

I remember a horse trainer who told me that he used to train his horses with
a wire brush so that whenever the horse was touched anywhere near the
withers it would cringe in a way that reduced its height. In this way the
horse trainer's horses were all the tallest horses in their class. If the
difference between a horse and a pony is < 14.2 hh or > 14.2 hh, then it's
easy to see how this horse trainer's strategy would work.

I have interspersed some other remarks.

on 1/10/03 12:33 PM, John S. Ward at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> I, for one, would certainly NOT agree.  A hand is already well defined and
> unambiguous.

Other tricks include the methods used for cutting the horses hooves and
trimming the hair on top of the horse's withers. Horse trading has been the
preferred home of cheats and rogues for many centuries, and measuring the
heights of horses is well polished in the trade.

> Having two significantly different definitions (total ambiguity
> of about 2.5 cm for a typical hunter/jumper is significant) would create
> exactly the sort of ambiguous situation that the metric system is supposed to
> be fixing.

It's not the measurement but the trade that's in question here. Traders like
to buy small animals and to sell large animals � these are often the same
horse � so the measurements are altered to suit the trade.

> Fifty or a hundred years in the future,

Two years ago, a horse-woman friend went to Sweden to attend a major horse
show. As she is an ultra conservative when it comes to measures, she was
appalled to find that the horses for the show were measured in metres as in
1.4�metres, 1.45�metres, 1.5�metres etc. She found it very difficult to cope
with this simplicity.

> when the last inches rulers and tape
> measures are collectable antiques and only historians remember how many
> inches are in a foot, horse owners will probably measure their horses in cm.

You may be right, but I would prefer that the Swedish method prevailed �
measuring in metres � then hands and metres could readily co-exist for as
long as it takes for the equestrian community to catch up with the real
world (what am I talking about � these people prefer 17th Century horses to
20th Century motor vehicles!)

My suspicion is that a hand will continue to be used, but that it will
quietly change to become 0.1 metres, for the simple reason that the
mathematics is so easy.

Traditionalist rider:   My horse is 17 hands
Modern equestrian:      Mine's bigger than yours � mine's 1.75 metres.

> John
> 
> On Tuesday 30 September 2003 18:13, Bill Potts wrote:
>> For a growing horse, accuracy is not essential. One could agree that a hand
>> is 4 inches or 10 centimeters.

But accuracy is essential. It makes all the difference between whether a
horse can compete against other horses or whether it is (measured and)
defined as a pony, in which case it can compete against other ponies. The
actual difference between one class and another ultimately will be less than
a few millimetres, and it doesn't matter whether the horse is growing or
not. The horse is re-measured (and therefore) re-defined for each meeting.

It also matters that 4 inches are defined as 101.6�millimetres. By the time
you measure a 13.3 hand pony (for example) it is no longer good enough to
say that it is 1.375 metres, because the horse is really 1.397�metres and
depending on the slope of the ground � or the mood of the measuring
official, this pony might be about to be defined as a horse.

>> However, there's some very good stuff on the subject at
>> http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/livestock/horses/facts/info_hands.htm.
>> Note that it's a Canadian web site.
> 
For another look at this same issue, try:

http://www.lovelongears.com/hands.html

I particularly like the idea of using a piece of carrot as a calibrating
instrument � it should make metrologists proud that their message about
accuracy is getting through!

Cheers,

Pat Naughtin LCAMS
Geelong, Australia

Pat Naughtin is the editor of the free online newsletter, 'Metrication
matters'. You can subscribe by sending an email containing the words
subscribe Metrication matters to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--

Reply via email to