IS THIS A SOLUTION TO :

Miniature Horse Talk Forums

Help Support Miniature Horse Talk Forums:

bob r

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Messages
134
Reaction score
0
IF EVERYONE IS UPSET ABOUT THE MEASURING PROCESS, WHY NOT ELIMATE IT.

THE ONLY HORSES TO BE MEASURED ARE THE ONES THAT ARE CLOSE TO 34" .JUST TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE UNDER 34"

NOW HOW ARE WE GOING TO SHOW THEM?

WEANLINGS COMPETE AGAINST ALL WEANLINGS

YEARLINGS COMPETE AGAINST ALL YEARLINGS

2 YR. OLD ETC

3 YR. OLD ETC

4 AND OVER ETC

NOW IF WE SHOWED THEM THIS WAY, THE TALLER WEANLINGS ARE PROBABLY GOING TO WIN, SAME GOES WITH THE YEARLINGS, 2 YR. OLDS AND ETC. BUT YOU DON'T HAVE THE MEASURING PROBLEM ANYMORE.

BUT THEN YOUR GOING TO HAVE THE PROBLEM WITH A BABY BEING BORN IN DEC. BUT NOT REG. UNTIL JAN, BUT THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY WAY TO CHEAT I WOULD THINK.

WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK. CRAZY SUGGESTION OR NOT?
 

Jill

Aspiring Cowgirl
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
27,188
Reaction score
527
Location
Spotsy., VA (USA)
But the thing is we'd still have the same problem w/ the ones who are close to 34". If things went the way it's being said to have gone, then we'd have 35" ones in the under 34"... BUT I do like the idea of competing the age groups together and taking the focus off the size because I'd rather have a horse who's a little taller but better built... however, I realize we are talking minis and there's a whole big school of thought that tiny is best. I just like those leggy ones A LOT!
 

Al B

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2002
Messages
904
Reaction score
60
Location
Cypress, Texas
I very much hesitate to get in on this but I was there. I think one important step in the measuring was eliminated this year and should not have been.

Last year a disinterested third party with considerable horse knowledge was the first to see the horse and made an ink mark on the horse indicating where the measurement should be made. You could discuss it with them but their mark was the measurement mark. At this point the measurer could not see the horse.

Then the horse was walked around to the measuring box and stood up. Then, the measurer, another disinterested third party with no connection made the measurement on the mark and that was it.

This year that separation of duties was not done and that made it difficult for the person measuring.
 

Mijke

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
256
Reaction score
0
Location
Netherlands, Europe
We have the same system here (Europe) as Bob r suggested.

Hate to dissapoint you, but that does not work either. We are going to different height classes next year because of it...

People tend to stay away from shows with their little (good) ones, because they simply cannot compete with the taller ones from the same age and gender. With this going on breeders breed for bigger miniatures, not smaller and more perfect...

We know, and also the judges (very good ones I have to say) know that when the horses are equal, the smaller one should win. But it is very hard to compare if they are all in the same class. Let me reassure you, the smaller ones never stand a chance, even if they are equal or better...
 

Mnmini

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2003
Messages
120
Reaction score
0
bob r said:
IF EVERYONE IS UPSET ABOUT THE MEASURING PROCESS, WHY NOT ELIMATE IT. THE ONLY HORSES TO BE MEASURED ARE THE ONES THAT ARE CLOSE TO 34"  .JUST TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE UNDER 34"

NOW HOW ARE WE GOING TO SHOW THEM?

WEANLINGS COMPETE AGAINST ALL WEANLINGS

YEARLINGS COMPETE AGAINST ALL YEARLINGS

2 YR. OLD ETC

3 YR. OLD ETC

4 AND OVER ETC

NOW IF WE SHOWED THEM THIS WAY,  THE TALLER WEANLINGS ARE PROBABLY GOING TO WIN,  SAME GOES WITH THE YEARLINGS, 2 YR. OLDS AND ETC.  BUT YOU DON'T HAVE THE MEASURING PROBLEM ANYMORE.

BUT THEN YOUR GOING TO HAVE THE PROBLEM WITH A BABY BEING BORN IN DEC. BUT NOT REG. UNTIL JAN,  BUT THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY WAY TO CHEAT I WOULD THINK.

WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK.    CRAZY SUGGESTION OR NOT?

482891[/snapback]

Babies born in December...good one. In the QH world, we have association inspectors looking for babies that have seen not only Christmas, but sometimes Thanksgiving and Halloween!
 

Cathy_H

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
2,113
Reaction score
0
with considerable horse knowledge was the first to see the horse and made an ink mark on the horse indicating where the measurement should be made.
Does anyone know WHY this was not done this year? I do remember reading in another post that some horses were seen with this mark way below the last hairs of the mane............................ Why not have two people measure the horse & split the difference (if both don't agree).............................Sorry Bob, still too many problems there also.
 

*minis*

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
251
Reaction score
0
Sorry to say that I don't like the idea at all. We all know that a miniature horse should be primarily bred to look like a horse, but also should be small. In a system where there are no height divisions, the smaller ones are not competitive anymore at all and we probably would only see horses at the shows that are dead on 34" ... which again leaves us with the problem, that there are some that are a little too dead on 34".

My opinion would be to measure at the highest point of the withers. Then there should be no problems to find out where the last hair of the mane is and I made the experience that measuring at the highest point of the withers is generally easier to do and more accurate. Of course, that brings another problem with it ... those that are 34" at the last hair of the mane would automatically be out. But if the height limit would be raised a little, that problem could be solved.

There is no perfect solution to this problem though.

However, I'd appreciate stricter measuring rules at the shows. The rule book says that where there are doubts or discussion as to the height, there should be three measurements, these three measurements should be added up and divided by three to find the average height. I like this approach very much. Things that obviously happened at the 2005 World Show must not happen anymore and I'd suggest that anyone who is attending shows first reads through the protest rules in the rulebook so that you can act accordingly if you wish to and if a situation arises that demands your protest.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

rabbitsfizz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
10,938
Reaction score
386
Location
England
Mijke, not true!! My 28" stallion was virtually unbeaten. He is old now, but still catches the Judges eye at his one show a year!!! My 25" filly was the same(Rabbits daughter) and I hope to continue the cycle with a colt I ma leasing (o/o and by my own bred animals) who stands 26" at 18 months. A good Littleun can beat a good Bigun any day- so long as they are good!! I know the little ones have shorter legs- Rabbit and his stock move out from the shoulder, as good as any big horse, and drive off the hocks, just the same. They are flashy, they are spirited and they win, in open height classes (we do not have height divided classes yet) I have heard the argument,but I just say "Breed better small horses, and they will win"

Measuring?? There is NO one answer, there never will be. Measure to the withers, as you cannot glue bits on there and it would help other horse people take you seriously- we will never change our way of measuring, and I have only ever had one person object to the way I was measuring and that was because they had got their wires crossed by going to an AMHA show and thought I should be measuring half way down their colts back (He was two inches over height, but he was also at least 1/2 " overheight measured "the American way") HOWEVER we have had our moments of controversy over horses heights, that I hope are now settled, and we have only been measuring for five years!!
 

Tabitha

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2004
Messages
80
Reaction score
0
Location
Manitoba
The problem with Bob's theory is, if officially aren't going to measure accurately & honestly, then you're going to see some 35" and 36" horses showing in there as 34" and unders--so it's still not fair.

Once again I'll say that measuring on top of the withers isn't going to guarantee accuracy either. It's pretty easy to "miss" the highest point by an inch or so. "Highest point of the withers" may see perfectly obvious to some, but there are those that could still have problems with accuracy. (I mean, if at AMHR they weren't even putting the stick on the floor in some cases, it doesn't much matter if they're measuring the last mane hair or top of the withers.) Not only that, but there are some very mutton withered Minis around, and on them it's very hard to tell exactly where the highest point is.
 

Mijke

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
256
Reaction score
0
Location
Netherlands, Europe
rabbitsfizz said:
Mijke, not true!! My 28" stallion was virtually unbeaten.  He is old now, but still catches the Judges eye at his one show a year!!!  My 25" filly was the same(Rabbits daughter) and I hope to continue the cycle with a colt I ma leasing (o/o and by my own bred animals) who stands 26" at 18 months.  A good Littleun can beat a good Bigun any day- so long as they are good!!  I know the little ones have shorter legs- Rabbit and his stock move out from the shoulder, as good as any big horse, and drive off the hocks, just the same. They are flashy, they are spirited and they win, in open height classes (we do not have height divided classes yet) I have heard the argument,but I just say "Breed better small horses, and they will win"
482949[/snapback]

O.k., there are exceptions...
rolleyes.gif
, but they are very rare. I myself have a very small junior mare that will mature in the 28" and under division. This summer she did take two 2nd places (classes with over 15 horses) and one time a 5th (over 20 horses). She was far out the smallest there, but I see myself that it is so hard to compare if 'biggies' stands besides her in the ring. She also did take two 3th places in liberty (competing with only stallions...). I'm very proud of that little tiny girl, but I know it is an exception. My feeling is that the smaller ones need to be (much) better than the bigger ones if shown in the same class...

I know a lot of horse owners do not come back with their small ones to other shows or do not enter the small ones from the herd in the show because of this.

Just breed a better small horse is a solution, but what I see is that most people start to take the easiest way towards the blue ribbons: breed big...
rolleyes.gif


I think that is the wrong way to breed for better MINIATURES...
 

bob r

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Messages
134
Reaction score
0
Mijke said:
rabbitsfizz said:
Mijke, not true!! My 28" stallion was virtually unbeaten.  He is old now, but still catches the Judges eye at his one show a year!!!  My 25" filly was the same(Rabbits daughter) and I hope to continue the cycle with a colt I ma leasing (o/o and by my own bred animals) who stands 26" at 18 months.  A good Littleun can beat a good Bigun any day- so long as they are good!!  I know the little ones have shorter legs- Rabbit and his stock move out from the shoulder, as good as any big horse, and drive off the hocks, just the same. They are flashy, they are spirited and they win, in open height classes (we do not have height divided classes yet) I have heard the argument,but I just say "Breed better small horses, and they will win"
482949[/snapback]

O.k., there are exceptions...
rolleyes.gif
, but they are very rare. I myself have a very small junior mare that will mature in the 28" and under division. This summer she did take two 2nd places (classes with over 15 horses) and one time a 5th (over 20 horses). She was far out the smallest there, but I see myself that it is so hard to compare if 'biggies' stands besides her in the ring. She also did take two 3th places in liberty (competing with only stallions...). I'm very proud of that little tiny girl, but I know it is an exception. My feeling is that the smaller ones need to be (much) better than the bigger ones if shown in the same class...

I know a lot of horse owners do not come back with their small ones to other shows or do not enter the small ones from the herd in the show because of this.

Just breed a better small horse is a solution, but what I see is that most people start to take the easiest way towards the blue ribbons: breed big...
rolleyes.gif


I think that is the wrong way to breed for better MINIATURES...

482965[/snapback]

 

bob r

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Messages
134
Reaction score
0
i'm not going to argue this point very much, but the measuring would only affect the horses that are close to 34", not the weanlings or the yearlings and probably most of the 2 yr. olds (we're talking amha here). ---and i have shown enough horses to know that the judges WILL PICK THE TALLER ONES the majority of the time when showing against the smaller ones so it would be a big dis-advantage to show the little ones. -----------------from what i heard the SHAME WITH AMHA WAS WITH THE CHAMPION OF CHAMPIONS CLASS. it got a top trainer hurt, and the poor mare was scared out of her witts, just so the owners could show her off.

sure was funny that the owners of the horse was a sponser of THAT CLASS.--------

-------oh and lets ask Belinda about the horse world magizenes being marked and in the middle of the judging ring. i hear she knows quite a bit about that situation.
 

Margo_C-T

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
2,407
Reaction score
114
Though it's not a 'perfect' answer, I still would strongly support changing to a a 'highest point of the withers' measurement. Even with mutton-withered horses, getting down level with the withers and 'sighting', along with use of the sense of touch to feel the bony processes, would bring a high degree of ability to be accurate in determination of that "highest point", I believe.

I personally would have no problem with eliminating the various height ranges by age, but don't think that'd EVER happen. And, you are STILL left with the problem of correct and honest determination of the upper height limit(whether it be 34" OR 38".)

I was at AMHA Nationals two shows ago. I personally observed several horses bearing the "measurement mark"; on the one I examined most closely, a mostly white pinto, who had had a rather long strip of body hair 'left', had the mark placed WELL 'below' where the actual last hairs of the mane emerged. On the others we saw(my travelling companion was 'horse shopping'), it appeared to be the same situation, though I did not have the opportunity to examine them as closely(and some had been bathed, and the mark washed away.) The idea seems admirable; however, I have to wonder what the unwritten understanding is.....my own experience bears out that setting the stick well down the back is at least one way to sidestep correct measurement. The sad thing is, the envelope is being pushed further and all-more encompassing every year, with a corresponding, widening expectation that so will it ever be. The term "bullying" doesn't even begin to describe what is and has been happening, in some instances,should the measurer try to strictly adhere to the RULEBOOK standards--and I have to wonder, how many local shows can even, or in fact, want to, find someone who is willing to try to stand up to that? People can and do get VERY nasty when what they have come to expect doesn't happen.....I have both seen it, and heard credible witness accounts of it. So--what do we do about that??

Another thought-why couldn't the stick simply be 'locked' on the various height limitations-then the horse is stood up properly, and the locked stick set carefully down in the PROPER location on the horse. If the bubble centers, OR, you can determine ANY space at all between the bottom of the stick and the horse's back, the horse is within the rulebook parameters. If determining whether a horse is within one of the 2" ranges, you would first lock the stick at the top of the range, then, if the horse was clearly well under that height, at the bottom of the range, to determine if the horse would fit into the next shorter range.
 

nootka

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2002
Messages
7,547
Reaction score
0
I did see that on the web came, someone DID get hurt, as I thought. Anyone know who got injured and how it happened? It looked like he was trying to assist or catch the spooked mare, and it WAS very silly and irresponsible of the people that had control of that mare to let her go w/that big wreath on her!

I don't know that the AMHA itself did have control over that situation at the time, but I would never have let that happen to my horse. I would have removed the wreath and then let her run at liberty, no harm in that, and a well-deserved honor.

I am sorry someone got hurt and the horse was frightened. I hope the trainer will be alright.

Liz
 

Margo_C-T

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
2,407
Reaction score
114
Just an FYI-Tony posted that the little mare slipped her halter, that her getting loose was accidental.

(I will say that my thought was that this incident reinforced my feelings about those insubstantial little "Arabian" type show halters. They are virtually worthless when it comes to any real control of the horse, should something untoward happen. I am well aware of why "everyone" uses them-doesn't change the fact that they give you precious little control.) An unfortunate outcome, though, for the frightened little mare and the injured man.
 
L

Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis

Guest
about that I wasn't there of course but seems the timing was quite coincidental that the music started the second she slipped out of her halter?? but could happen i suppose but obviously no one thought that would be the end result. The horse at AMHR ran iwth his ribbon on ( I am almost positive) and didint have the same result - in fact it was beautiful- which I am sure was the intention(Assuming there was one and it was done on purpose with horses you just never know fine with someone once and not the next time.
 

LaVern

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2004
Messages
1,299
Reaction score
34
I once heard that the Shetlands used to me measured with a measuring stick that was on each side of the horse and then a bar slid down. That seems like it would be easier for the steward. Could anyone tell me if that is right and why they don't do that anymore. I guess if it was used and they quit using it , that must not have worked either.
 

Minimor

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
8,708
Reaction score
1,168
Location
Brandon Manitoba
A friend of mine recently had one of those old measure sticks given to her--it's got the support that goes one each side of the horse & the bar across--she said she thinks it is great, SO accurate.

Speaking of horses accidentally getting away--while the cable halters LOOK fragile, I haven't had any problem at all with horses getting away--the only issue I've seen is if you use a snap end shank, that you should tape it so it cannot come open. I prefer the buckle end....

However, there used to be a fellow that showed Arabs here. At every single show, when he had his stallion out in the ring, that stallion "accidentally" got loose. Every single time. "Accidental" only works for so many times. This fellow ended up causing a few of the fairs to eliminate their senior stallion classes.
 

rabbitsfizz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
10,938
Reaction score
386
Location
England
As far as I am concerned a loose horse in the ring constitutes it being dangerously out of control, which is against the rules. The horse should have been disqualified. This sort of thing is sheer lunacy- I cannot believe it is allowed/encouraged or even tolerated. If it could be proven that it was accidental, over here it would make no difference as our rules state the halter should be capable of controlling the animal it is used for- up to and including actually staying on their horses head. We had a young woman at a show a few years back, showing a young cot. Her halter literally fell apart on the horses head- just unravelled- she had her arms round the colts neck as it was happening and three people had stopped to give her lead reins etc off their own horses before the colt knew what had happened. That was in NO WAY her "fault" BUT it most certainly was her responsibility. If you are watching your horse and you do not intend these things to happen, they can be avoided!! If this sort of thing is tolerated because it is an "important " person doing it- shame on everyone concerned- how long before someone does it with a stallion???? Does a bystander or a horse actually have to be killed before someone does something??

Same with the overheight horses- too many people with "important" names with to much invested to measure their horse out?? This has to stop, it is ludicrous. You already have 36" horses being touted as 34"- how much further do they want to bend the rules before it isn't worth anyone showing. Perhaps you could all just send in photos of your horse, with the amount you are willing to pay for it to win written on the back and sit back and wait for your ribbon to come through the post!

OK so I am overstating the case here, but you can see the way it's all going. Basically, whilst people are trying to break the rules, there is no way of getting the measuring straight.
 

Meavey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2004
Messages
821
Reaction score
2
Location
The Netherlands
Not measuring will not help.

Maybe just let 3 people measure every horse and then divide the results by 3, there is your size.

That is already the rule after someone protest, but wy not do it all the time?

Especially one such "big" shows.

And make sure the measuring is by people that are not related or friends to the people showing, or take the measurers from different parts of the usa.
 

Latest posts