Ok, my question of the night, since all the experts are on?

Question

I need an opinion, not considering to buy but want to know where peoples likes fall. Both of these fillies are APHA one is long and lean the other is more traditional, both would excel in performance, which do you prefer.

http://www.breedlovefarms.com/horse.asp?Id=319

http://www.breedlovefarms.com/horse.asp?Id=361

not considering either, just wanting judgments, positive and negative

Answer 1

For me, the 1st more typical does not look three at all..has a very immature and stunted look to me.  But I like her head.  But just not exciting to me.

I prefer the 2nd.  I love the color and markings and looks proper for a yearling.  As an english rider and a tall person, I like the long and lanky look of this one.  Her head is bigger but I do like her body type and her uniqueness.

Answer 2

lol where'd all the experts go.

I actually prefer the second one. don't kill me!! she's just so cool looking. although the first one is very much better put together

Answer 3

I don't agree with anyone on number one, and you couldn't have suckered me into another conformation thing if it weren't for that!!!!  If you look closer, you'll see that the terrain is downhill in the photo....see how the front fetlocks disappear into the grass.  I believe this horse has very strong legs, and I forgive his longer cannons on the back for the way his tendons and muscles tie in.  His croup is a bit short, but he makes up for it in other strengths.  I'd like a lower stifle, but something I'm seeing and can't pinpoint right now tells me this one is strong and capable.  He has a good back and strong loins and a balanced front end.  He's balanced and his legs are built very well, and his downhill appearance is an optical illusion.  I pick him hands down over the other one.  And I'm too tired to talk about that one, but trust me...no contest. How are these judges being trained to assess function?  the cannons on number two are way too long.

EQUUS...ok...you're the baby expert!

Answer 4

i dont know so much that either are the most spectacular horses as you said.. but they do have potential. if i had to choose, the second would be my favorite. she is a little bit too leggy for my liking.. the rest of her body seems a little small for her legs but the first one looks like she is built uphill which i cannot get passed.

Answer 5

To me, the 1st one is too down hill for me at 3yrs. I agree she looks stunted in her growth. I like the 2nd one. More racing type. I like the back end much better.

****edit******

Thank you!!!  I can't make my mind up with what I want! LOL Tooo hot here... brain fried! LOL   I like your, too!!!!!!  I like the 2nd. She looks nice. If it was me looking to buy, I'd want more leg shots & back legs.

Answer 6

I was going to say the first... Nice legs, cute head, pretty neck, well sprung ribs... But three years old?! And still that butt high and tiny? No thanks.......

The second one is a nice looking filly, but not quite my type. She's too fine boned and slender for my taste. She's going to be a tall one, huh?

I can't figure out if number one being a three year old is a typo...She sure looks like a yearling.... Look at that tail? Ahhh i don't know.... hehe okay, if number one is a yearling, she's my choice. If not, I'll go with two.. =)

Answer 7

The first one is built very downhill, and at 3 her withers are unlikely to catch up with her hindquarters.  She's got a cute head and expression, but is sickle hocked and her knees aren't great.  I don't see her excelling at performance; she'll have difficulty getting her hind end under her and will be heavy on the forehand.

The 2nd one's slightly downhill, but at 1 that's usually the case and her front end should catch up.  She's not the typical overmuscled quarterhorse; has more of a refined tb/appendix type.  She's got nice balance, a lovely head, nice neck, clean throatlatch.  Her legs aren't overlong for her age, but I'd like to see more of the length in the gaskins/forearms and less in the cannons.

Of the two, I'd take the 2nd.  Looks like a nice prospect for eventing.

Answer 8

Look at the mane on the #1 filly, she's a yearling, or not quite, in that picture.   Even without paint markings, she's the nicer of the two.

Answer 9

2nd the dun is not very nice to look at where i think the paint would be a show winner

Answer 10

I would only consider buying #2.  He is much better balanced, has a shorter back and underline, a prettier head and neck, and a nice hip.  I think his neck ties into his body beautifully.  I am confident this horse could excel in the HUS and western arenas.

#1 is has a huge potbelly which makes it difficult to look at.  He also has a poor head and neck.  He has a very long back and underline.  He does have a very nice hip on him, but today his croup is about 6+ inches higher than his whithers.  I also do not like the way his neck ties into his shoulder.  I am suspicious that the picture might be really poor as it does look like he's on a downward hill making him look really out of balance and his mane makes his neck look worse.  

Anyway - as a horse show judge - since we judge them on how they enter the arena today - I would place #2 or #1...and if I were going to buy one of them to be my future performance horse I would bring home #2.

Answer 11

I think it's funny that people say that second horse is too skinny.  I think she's perfect.  I think too many people have fat horses and a normal horse looks skinny because peoples' perspectives are so skewed.

Anywho, I like the second one.  I grew up around thoroughbreds and prefer that long lanky look.  Everyone around here (Wyoming) has quarter horses but I just can't get used to that chunky look.  It doesn't seem as athletic to me.  As everyone has already discussed, the second horse is conformationally superior, even as a yearling.  Even though she's "thoroughbredy" she still looks like she has a nice powerful hind end, nice neck and shoulder.

Answer 12

I do not really care for either but if I had to choose I would go for the dun. I like paints with more asthetic color blocks. Second's is kind of random. He looks more built for speed or high jumps with those long legs.

Answer 13

Wow the overo filly is quite an eye catcher!!!! I could manage with a horse like that!

Answer 14

Both look like fine fillys but it depends on what you want. The 2nd would be a good jumper though her rump is higher than her withers =/

The First is a nice once, she's pretty but she doesn't look near as old as they say she is because how short her tail in mane. It is possible it's just cut that short or it's a young picture but I'd go with the first I think. The second one's bones would be easier to break because how long her legs are.

Answer 15

I don't really like either....If I had to choose I would probably choose number one because I like the chunkier confirmation... #2 is lean, but too lanky...yet if #1 is a yearling...then I wouldn't buy her, her growth looked very unbalance. Both cute though, but not my taste really..

Answer 16

i like "duns"chest better than "hot"and for the work i do with horses i prefer a larger lung capacity.i really dont like either but if i had to pick i would prefer "dun"

Answer 17

1st one

Holy c**p!!  That 1st one is a 3 yr. old???  What the h**l happened to it?  I thought it was a yearling.....Well, in that case, I choose.....neither!

Second one is too fine boned for my taste.

Answer 18

the second one is anorexic! =)

never been a fan of anyone or thing anorexic~ =)

Answer 19

I love both of them, but I agree the first one is a little too downhill. I've ridden horses that had a problem with this, and it was THE most uncomfortable ride of my life >.<; Pitty though cuz the horse was sweet.

Anyways, I'd go with the second. She's TALL. Personally, I love a nice, long, tall horse. I agree however, I'd like to see some more meat on her. But you have to take into account that she is a yearling still, and a has a LOT more growing to do. This being said, giving her some extra feed/supplements to help build muscle, and just letting her grow out on her own, I think she'd mature to a very nice, attractive horse. My only issue would be if/when breeding her, I'd like to know whether she's a lethal white carrier or not.