# Another question for Adam or any judges :)



## kaykay (Nov 13, 2007)

okay adam this is something else I have always wondered. The rule book says that horses are judged 60 percent on conformation and type and 40 percent on performance, quality and manners

As a judge do you really care about manners? will you mark a horse down with bad manners? I saw quite a few really bad mannered classic ponies but they still won? Not sour grapes because I was not showing against them but i am curious if manners really do matter to a judge?


----------



## hhpminis (Nov 14, 2007)

HEHE, the rule book doesn't say "good" manners.


----------



## kaykay (Nov 14, 2007)

LOL so true! but we are supposed to be promoting classic ponies as the ultimate childs pony and umm the ones I saw I would not let a child near!


----------



## alongman (Nov 14, 2007)

Good question........I want an animal showing to me that WANTS to be showing. If you look at some of the best ponies - they can be very "enthusiastic" to the point of being a little edgy, but are just excited. I don't want to see a pony that's baring his teeth and acting crazy. I will fault a horse with a bad attitude - primarily in performance divisions though.

If you look back at my "10 scale", a point or two may be lost for not having a great attitude (with some weight behind it). The bad attitude pony may still have more ring presence than a pony with other conformational issues. I would agree that we should be promoting fun "kids ponies" but ultimately the rule says nothing about that....


----------



## txminipinto (Nov 14, 2007)

Adam, I think this topic is great. If you don't mind, look at these 3 ponies and give me your impression. All are Foundation certified.

Yearling stallion






Yearling mare






2yr old stallion


----------



## alongman (Nov 14, 2007)

Ok....again, only my opinion. I'll try to keep it related to the Foundation stuff....lol

Black colt:

Extreme for a Foundation - nice length of neck, maybe a little longer backed with a juvenile back end. He has a nice hip that I think will continue to muscle out. He has a more pony look to his head. Based on his stance, I would think that he could easily show Classic if not even Modern Pleasure. He is built like many of those top-performing animals.

Pinto mare:

I would say - a perfect Foundation example. I love all this mares parts - she has a great show ring presence, alert eyes and ears, nice neck that sets well into her body, good shoulder. She has a little more coarseness to her bone structure, so I think she is a prime Foundation example. In this picture, she is showing a little more "parked" than some of the Foundation horses are showing as well. This would be a judgement call - she looks mature for her age. This could either help or hurt her in the class - she may look more masculine than another yearling filly in the same division.

Pinto stallion:

He isn't my favorite horse - he tends to have parts that I would consider in the "gray area". His head is plain - no "pop" when you look at him. He doesn't have an ugly head though by any means. His neck has nice length with a good set into his shoulder. He has a nice angle of shoulder. Nice length of body and nice hip. He looks to be a little weak in the rear end and this could be a level of maturity thing. He has a questionable thickness of bone - probably more thick than his counterparts showing Classic, but more refined than the Foundation ponies. IMO, this would be a colt I'd sit on. I'd see how he matured before determining where to place him. From a judging perspective, he would also be hard to place because of the faults I noted but also as he is one of those "tweeners".


----------



## Lmequine (Nov 14, 2007)

Great reply Adam on Carin's three ponies. I know all three well and you and I see them same.

Thanks for the judging clinic as it pertains to foundation ponies!


----------



## txminipinto (Nov 14, 2007)

Thank you Adam, the forum must have burped because I KNOW I posted these pics on the other topic!







alongman said:


> Ok....again, only my opinion. I'll try to keep it related to the Foundation stuff....lol
> 
> Black colt:
> 
> ...


----------



## alongman (Nov 15, 2007)

"Thanks for the evaluations and I would love to see you come down to Texas sometime."

I'm always happy to provide my opinion. I do appreciate the feedback on how you feel as well. I am always happy to judge anywhere


----------



## Boinky (Nov 15, 2007)

yes this is a good question.. i can't tell you how often i see (especially on the local level) horses rearing, leaping, kicking ect and STILL win.. they might be the nicests horses but i don't see how a judge can place them first if their feet are never on the ground....


----------



## alongman (Nov 15, 2007)

BWMinis -

Let me begin by stating that this is a beautiful mare no matter what division she is shown. Here's my critique though. She has a dished head with expressive eyes. Face may be a little long and it's accentuated by the dishiness to her head. Nice neck with good connection into her body. It's hard to evaluate her shoulder as her markings and the lighting make it almost impossible (this is sometimes the case in the actual ring as well - you will often see judges move a horse just to change the lighting). Nice chest and barrel. She does have a little slope to her rear end. For halter horses, I like to see a nice flat top-line. This could be due to her age and level of maturity or just her conformation. Looks to have good solid leg conformation with a feminine appearance.

If I were placing this horse, I would say that she exhibits a more Classic appearance than a Foundation appearance. I wouldn't be intimidated (as many people are) by the height difference she is sure to encounter in the Shetland classes. It looks as though she can hold her own.


----------



## alongman (Nov 15, 2007)

Alison -

First, I don't believe that there are any specifics for qualifying for Congress. I could be WAY off on that one, but I think it is a show that can be entered like any other.

Second, thanks for the background - we all have our emotional attachments and obviously she has earned hers.

Finally, let me try to explain the Foundation Seal. The Foundation Seal means that a pony has lineage that has been traced back for several generations of "true" Shetland breeding. My understanding is that these lines don't include crossing of Hackneys, etc... into the first few generations. A pony that has the Foundation seal *CAN* show in the Foundation class as well as in the Classic classes. A pony without the Foundation seal can only show in the Classic class (not the Foundation class).

A good person to direct the questions regarding obtaining a Foundation seal to would be Lewella! She has this amazing ability to recall pedigrees of most of everyone elses' herd not only her own. She's a walking stud book.


----------



## Lewella (Nov 19, 2007)

alongman said:


> A good person to direct the questions regarding obtaining a Foundation seal to would be Lewella! She has this amazing ability to recall pedigrees of most of everyone elses' herd not only her own. She's a walking stud book.


LOL Haven't had it said quite that way before but that works!





Any pony with 4 generations of all A papered ancestors (that means one generation off the papers is still all A's) can be Foundation Certified. My Modern Hall of Fame stallion is Foundation Certified - he qualifies on pedigree. Of course being Foundation Certified does not make a pony Foundation type. A Foundation Certified pony can show in ANY division (must be 42 inches or under for Foundation though) that it fits on type.


----------



## alongman (Nov 20, 2007)

I only call them like I see them Lewella..........


----------



## minih (Nov 24, 2007)

Very informative thread!! I love reading your comments Adam along with the people who the horses belong to.


----------

