The Percheron as a saddle horse.
Mike Burnett
The interest in Frisians has stimulated my long interest in the Percheron
as a saddle horse. During the nineteenth century, because of its ability
to trot for long periods and its busy walk, they were commonly used as
carriage horses and, at times, as saddle horses.
With late comers to riding as novices like myself, big, heavy and somewhat
unathletic, I look for enormous strength in a horse so as not to be
burdensome to it, steadiness, gentleness and, where speed is concerned,
the occasional gentle canter. I also look for a broad back with the
comfort of an armchair. I'm betting the Percheron would fill the bill.
Has anyone experience of this breed? Has anyone seen them under saddle?
Any society addresses or email?
Thanks for your time.
Mike.
Deborah Stevenson
I'm friendly with a Perch/Morgan cross who, in fact, looks just like a
Friesian. She fits your description quite nicely (depending on what you
mean by "enormous" strength, I suppose) and is currently riding and
driving (she's quite green and curious but very, very calm). I suppose
my comments boil down to 1) don't overlook crosses and 2) sounds like a
feasible idea to me :-).
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Friend of Faith in Champaign, IL, USA
Kris Anderson
In article <memo.1997100...@mburnett.compulink.co.uk>,
mbur...@cix.co.uk says...
>
>The interest in Frisians has stimulated my long interest in the Percheron
>as a saddle horse. During the nineteenth century, because of its ability
>to trot for long periods and its busy walk, they were commonly used as
>carriage horses and, at times, as saddle horses.
>With late comers to riding as novices like myself, big, heavy and somewhat
>unathletic, I look for enormous strength in a horse so as not to be
>burdensome to it, steadiness, gentleness and, where speed is concerned,
>the occasional gentle canter. I also look for a broad back with the
>comfort of an armchair. I'm betting the Percheron would fill the bill.
>Has anyone experience of this breed? Has anyone seen them under saddle?
I've ridden an occasional Percheron, and IMO they're fine if you really don't
want to keep up with a bunch of Arabs on a long, hilly trail ride or do a lot of
jumping or fast work--and if you don't mind if your horse sweats up a lake on
hot days, costs twice as much to shoe and feed as a smaller horse--and if you
also don't care if you have to commission a custom made saddle to fit him. :-)
So, if you don't mind the extra expense of maintaining a large horse and you can
either keep the horse fit enough to do what you want to do, or don't mind taking
it easy with him, a Percheron would likely be a good horse for you.
Shires and Clydes are usually built better for riding, IMO, but it's even more
difficult to find modest-sized ones in those breeds.
I personally think that draft crosses usually make the better saddle horses, but
that depends entirely upon the individuals.
Kris
Mark Howard
Mike Burnett wrote:
- SNIP -
> Has anyone experience of this breed? Has anyone seen them under saddle?
During college (Texas A&M), I had an opportunity to work a Percheron
Mare (5 y.o.) and several other draft horses for a period of about 6
months. It was an experiment to compare her rate of physical
conditioning to that of several diferent breeds. Other students worked
with the other breeds.
She was a lovable and willing mount. She was responsive and learned at
a "reasonable" rate (albiet, more slowly than QH's or Arabs). Although,
her rate of physical conditioing improvement was relatively slow, at the
end of 6 months she could easily handle a novice competitive trail ride
(25 miles/day).
On the down side, she was NOT a comfortable mount. She had a very steep
shoulder and would beat your fillings out at a trot. She did not own a
trot that you could sit. Because of the breadth of her back, posting
was rough rough on your knees on a long ride.
On the up side, her sire was somewhat smaller and considerably more
comfortable (better conformation). However, he was considerably less
tractable (mostly a training problem) and still not a horse you would
want to spend all day riding.
Of the draft horses, the Clydesdale was the most "fun" to ride (mostly
because of her *bounce* and personality.
!!!WARNING!!! Before you buy, make sure you have a farrier who is
willing to work on BIG feet. The 2 local farriers, at the time, refused
to work on draft horses at any price. As a result, I had to do them
myself. Ohhh, my aching back!
Good Luck
Mark H.
Houston, TX
CATHERINE ALEXANDRA PAFORT
>I read somewhere that the Warmblood horse originated as a cross between
>Coldblood horses (Percheron, Clydesdale, etc.) and Hotblooded horses
>(Thoroughbreds & Arabs). If this is true, than you can get away with
>such a cross. You can have the build and disposition of the Percheron,
>with the riding ability, athleticism and intelligence of the
>Thoroughbred.
The warmblood is a warmblood. There have been (unsuccessful) attempts to cross
in heavier horses, but mostly WBs come from a long line of *riding* horses.
Bear in mind that the old-fashioned Draft horses were lighter and more agile
than the REALLY heavy breeds that are pulling heavy weights at walk, and also
often bred for flesh production - most french breeds, and Belgians come to
mind.
>Off course you won't have the modern Warmblood (which is bred for
>generations now to perform), but you won't pay the same price for them
>either...
Personally, wanting to do more active pursuits - a little jumping, dressage,
and in the end endurance I would look for an *athletic* horse. Weight, IME,
isn't an issue as long as the rider is *balanced* and knows how to ride a horse
over the back.
I don't like the reinvention of the wheel - the crosses I've seen were far from
athletic and harmonious. Breeding experiments seldom pay off. If you're looking
for a sturdy mount, look at Welsh Cobs, Highlands, or a heavy warmblood like
the Irish Draft.
Catja
Chris Henderson
In article <61j1lc$orb$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Deborah Stevenson) writes:
> In <memo.1997100...@mburnett.compulink.co.uk> mbur...@cix.co.uk (Mike Burnett) writes:
>
> >as a saddle horse. During the nineteenth century, because of its ability
> >to trot for long periods and its busy walk, they were commonly used as
> >carriage horses and, at times, as saddle horses.
> >With late comers to riding as novices like myself, big, heavy and somewhat
> >unathletic, I look for enormous strength in a horse so as not to be
> >burdensome to it, steadiness, gentleness and, where speed is concerned,
> >the occasional gentle canter. I also look for a broad back with the
> >Has anyone experience of this breed? Has anyone seen them under saddle?
>
> Friesian. She fits your description quite nicely (depending on what you
> mean by "enormous" strength, I suppose) and is currently riding and
> driving (she's quite green and curious but very, very calm). I suppose
> my comments boil down to 1) don't overlook crosses and 2) sounds like a
> feasible idea to me :-).
>
> Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
> Friend of Faith in Champaign, IL, USA
I would second Deborah's suggestion to look at some cross-
breeds. The barn I board at has 2 Clydesdale/QH crosses
and 2 Percheron/QH crosses. They all have the strength of
the draft horse plus the smaller size of the QH. All
have wonderful calm, quiet personalities, which makes them
ideal for adult beginners. They also seem to learn things
quickly and are easy to train. I would highly recommend
a draft cross!
Christine Henderson
Deborah Stevenson
In <01bcd585$0047bf80$0e42...@MichaelW.Johnson.wgcgps.com> "Michael W.
Johnson" <mjoh...@jamyourspam.com> writes:
>The horse I see recommended in books for elderly novice riders is the
>Tennessee Walking Horse (TWH). Some of them are quite large, over
>16hh, though not as large as a Percheron. They do have the advantage
>of a smooth four-beat intermediate gait, the running walk, which they do
>instead of a trot. The best of them have a smooth "rocking chair canter"
>as well. On most trail rides I've seen, the TWH are out front and the
>non-gaited horses bring up the rear. It's not that TWH are all that fast.
>It's just that they can do that smooth running walk all day, without any
>discomfort to the rider. TWH are also noted for their sweet dispositions.
>You can probably guess what breed of horse I own.
I beg to differ somewhat, Mike, but not in a negative way. My main
cadged ride is a TWH, and when it comes to the regular walk, yes, she *is*
that fast :-). She doesn't have to gait to outpace anybody--she just
starts swinging along at a real walk and everybody else seems to be on
pogo sticks...
Other than that, I concur heartily with your statements. And you don't
necessarily have to give up a trot, either.
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Whose boots are made for walking in Champaign, IL, USA
Eiyan
> I look for enormous strength in a horse so as not to be
>burdensome to it, steadiness, gentleness and, where speed is concerned,
>the occasional gentle canter. I also look for a broad back with the
>comfort of an armchair.
Have you considered a Cleveland Bay?? You can email me for more info.
Ann
Kris Anderson
In article <01bcd585$0047bf80$0e42...@MichaelW.Johnson.wgcgps.com>, "Michael
says...
>
>Mike Burnett <mbur...@cix.co.uk> wrote in article
><memo.1997100...@mburnett.compulink.co.uk>...
>> The interest in Frisians has stimulated my long interest in the Percheron
>> as a saddle horse. During the nineteenth century, because of its ability
>> to trot for long periods and its busy walk, they were commonly used as
>> carriage horses and, at times, as saddle horses.
>> With late comers to riding as novices like myself, big, heavy and somewhat
>> burdensome to it, steadiness, gentleness and, where speed is concerned,
>> the occasional gentle canter. I also look for a broad back with the
>> Has anyone experience of this breed? Has anyone seen them under saddle?
>> Thanks for your time.
>> Mike.
>
>Tennessee Walking Horse (TWH). Some of them are quite large, over
>16hh, though not as large as a Percheron. They do have the advantage
>of a smooth four-beat intermediate gait, the running walk, which they do
>instead of a trot. The best of them have a smooth "rocking chair canter"
>as well. On most trail rides I've seen, the TWH are out front and the
>non-gaited horses bring up the rear. It's not that TWH are all that fast.
>It's just that they can do that smooth running walk all day, without any
>discomfort to the rider. TWH are also noted for their sweet dispositions.
>You can probably guess what breed of horse I own.
>
>Houston, TX
I agree that TWH and other gaited horses are very comfortable to ride all day,
and they make good trail mounts for riders who want to participate in rides
without having to stay in shape.
The main problem I have with gaited horses is that most of them are limited when
it comes to any kind of competition where you need a W/T/C/jump horse, and for
those of us who ride at least partially for exercise, they're just about
useless.
Fortunately, most of them can be taught to trot. :-)
Kris
Donna Guyton
Deborah,
I did a little research, seeing as I am no **expert**, to ensure my
information was correct.
Please refer to the **Tennessee Walking Horse** homepage located at
http://www.twhbea.com in which I **learned** the following:
TWH's can be taught to do dressage, jumping, barrel racing, pleasure
driving, western riding, reining, trail riding, endurance riding, as well
as the more traditional performance classes.
TWH's blood lines can be traced back to Thoroughbreds, Standardbreds,
Morgans, Narragansett Pacers, and the American Saddlebred.
TWH's gaits are walk, running walk (which they are most famous for), and
canter. They are also capable of performing the rack, stepping pace,
fox-trot, single-foot, and other variations of the running walk, while this
is not desirable in **true** walking horse **only** shows the above
mentioned gaits are smooth easy trail riding gaits.
Thanks for motivating me to search that one out........I needed a little
reminder myself.
Donna Guyton
Guyton Stables, SC
Donna Guyton
Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote in article
<61lu04$9j6$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
> In <01bcd5a7$0f8413a0$af3a74cc@spiver> "Donna Guyton" <rac...@juno.com>
writes:
>
> >Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote in article
> ><61lo1u$2fb$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
>
> (snip my queries about TWHs and racking)
>
> >In the big lick division, or **racking** classes if you look
> >very closely, the saddlebreds and walkers are in fact....pacing or doing
a
> >stepping pace.
>
> I suspect you will sympathize when I say I don't particularly wish to
> look at big lick stuff at all, let alone closely.
>
I, also, do not care to watch the **big lick** stuff or show my horses in
that division (since they are all barefoot or lite shod). But, since it is
a major part of the shows I attend, you cannot help but see.
Donna Guyton
Donna Guyton
Kris Anderson <kand...@williams.edu> wrote in article
<61ldth$a...@drn.zippo.com>...
TWH's are, in fact, used in alot of gymka events such as barrel racing,
pole bending, jumping, driving, etc. The loss of the trot gait does not
impair their ability to perform, but rather gives the rider an easier mount
to ride. My TWH's will canter very slowly and sometimes gallop at full
speed in the field. (I have some barrels out there for them to run
around.) But, when they are under saddle, they know that cantering is not
allowed, and the horses concentration will be emphasized on the walk,
running walk, and rack. If a TWH is taught to canter and is allowed to
canter, it will, which makes it versatile for gymka events.
Just to make something clear.....I am not talking about the very heavily
padded and shod walkers. I am talking about the lite shod walker who will
usually gait without a shoe on his or her foot. It's a matter of
preference......you either want the walker to gait.....or you want the
walker to canter and gallop for performance events.....I have found that
they cannot do both at the same time.....it's one or the other.
:-)
Deborah Stevenson
In <01bcd59d$0acfbee0$a3bd74cc@spiver> "Donna Guyton" <rac...@juno.com> writes:
>TWH's are, in fact, used in alot of gymka events such as barrel racing,
>pole bending, jumping, driving, etc. The loss of the trot gait does not
>impair their ability to perform, but rather gives the rider an easier mount
>to ride. My TWH's will canter very slowly and sometimes gallop at full
>speed in the field. (I have some barrels out there for them to run
>around.) But, when they are under saddle, they know that cantering is not
>allowed, and the horses concentration will be emphasized on the walk,
>running walk, and rack. If a TWH is taught to canter and is allowed to
>canter, it will, which makes it versatile for gymka events.
Okay, I've kind of fallen into my TWH and you've got the word in your
email address :-), but I've never heard of TWHs racking. Their one
unusual gait, AFAIK, is the running walk; it's Saddlebreds who rack in
addition to slow gait/stepping pace.
>Just to make something clear.....I am not talking about the very heavily
>padded and shod walkers. I am talking about the lite shod walker who will
>usually gait without a shoe on his or her foot. It's a matter of
>preference......you either want the walker to gait.....or you want the
>walker to canter and gallop for performance events.....I have found that
>they cannot do both at the same time.....it's one or the other.
My limited understanding and experience has always been that you may have
to choose between trot and running walk (they do have certain similarities),
but never canter and running walk. There's a huge emphasis on the TWH
canter, historically. Not that it be fast, admittedly, but that it be
there and durable and extremely smooth. Is there some show-ring result
of a disappearing canter? I'm a bit confused.
I snipped Kris' queries about their abilities--FWIW, the old girl I ride
is a former eventer (I don't know what level, but it was under Jessica
J.). She's a bit arthritic now and I don't quite have the strength and
specificity to assist with a trot rather than a running walk, so we end
up in the latter more than the former. But she used to trot out just
fine, she does it sometimes now, and she can always running walk and
canter, plus walk up a storm.
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Riding but not drinking black Velvet in Champaign, IL, USA
Donna Guyton
Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote in article
<61lo1u$2fb$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
> In <01bcd59d$0acfbee0$a3bd74cc@spiver> "Donna Guyton" <rac...@juno.com>
writes:
>
> >TWH's are, in fact, used in alot of gymka events such as barrel racing,
> >pole bending, jumping, driving, etc. The loss of the trot gait does not
> >impair their ability to perform, but rather gives the rider an easier
mount
> >to ride. My TWH's will canter very slowly and sometimes gallop at full
> >speed in the field. (I have some barrels out there for them to run
> >around.) But, when they are under saddle, they know that cantering is
not
> >allowed, and the horses concentration will be emphasized on the walk,
> >running walk, and rack. If a TWH is taught to canter and is allowed to
> >canter, it will, which makes it versatile for gymka events.
>
> Okay, I've kind of fallen into my TWH and you've got the word in your
> email address :-), but I've never heard of TWHs racking.
It is a taught gait, IOW, an unnatural or artificial gait in **most**
walkers. Some walkers do possess the ability to pace and rack naturally
and are usually bred to do so, but the latter is seen few and far
between.....the former is seen more. Some will walk, running walk, pace,
canter and some will walk, running walk, rack, and canter. My walkers do
it naturally, except for one which is shod to do it, and that is what I
look for when I am purchasing a walker. In SC, it maybe different in other
areas, the TWH is mostly the breed in the racking classes although they are
actually pacing (Big Lick type). You will find more of the **true**
racking walkers in the flat shod division and trail pleasure division.
Their one
> unusual gait, AFAIK, is the running walk; it's Saddlebreds who rack in
> addition to slow gait/stepping pace.
Actually, IME, most Saddlebreds I have seen and ridden are pacers.
Although there may be **true** rackers, I have never seen or ridden one,
considering that the horse shows are equally occupied by as many walkers as
saddlebreds. In the big lick division, or **racking** classes if you look
very closely, the saddlebreds and walkers are in fact....pacing or doing a
stepping pace.
>
> >Just to make something clear.....I am not talking about the very heavily
> >padded and shod walkers. I am talking about the lite shod walker who
will
> >usually gait without a shoe on his or her foot. It's a matter of
> >preference......you either want the walker to gait.....or you want the
> >walker to canter and gallop for performance events.....I have found that
> >they cannot do both at the same time.....it's one or the other.
>
> My limited understanding and experience has always been that you may have
> to choose between trot and running walk (they do have certain
similarities),
> but never canter and running walk.
I, or any of my other acquaintances into the walking horses, have never had
a problem with running walks and canters.
There's a huge emphasis on the TWH
> canter, historically. Not that it be fast, admittedly, but that it be
> there and durable and extremely smooth.
Exactly!
Is there some show-ring result
> of a disappearing canter? I'm a bit confused.
If you have a walker that does a good walk, running walk, and rack, most
owners shun away from cantering their horses so as not to confuse the horse
into thinking that the canter is an acceptable gait. Cantering the horse
will usually result in a lower speed in the walk, running walk, and rack,
and when the horse has had enough he will switch to the canter.......THAT
is why most walking horse owners that show their horses in gaited classes
do not canter their horses. (or at least in SC)
To tell the truth, I have never heard the judges of the shows I go to ever,
and I mean EVER, call for a canter gait. I have never heard it, and maybe
that is why it is disappearing. All I have ever hear them ask for in the
Big Lick and Flat Shod division is a show walk, slow rack, and a fast rack
(which looks all the same to me, except for in the flat shod class). In
the trail pleasure division they ask for a walk and a trail rack.
> I snipped Kris' queries about their abilities--FWIW, the old girl I ride
> is a former eventer (I don't know what level, but it was under Jessica
> J.). She's a bit arthritic now and I don't quite have the strength and
> specificity to assist with a trot rather than a running walk, so we end
> up in the latter more than the former. But she used to trot out just
> fine, she does it sometimes now, and she can always running walk and
> canter, plus walk up a storm.
One of my walkers can walk up a storm too......it is all I can do to keep
him slow enough that everyone else can keep up.
>
> Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
> Riding but not drinking black Velvet in Champaign, IL, USA
>
I am no expert by no means, and I am sure that everyone has their own
experiences with walkers, but what I speak is of what I see, learn, and do
with walkers in horse shows, training, etc in SC.
Deborah Stevenson
In <01bcd5a7$0f8413a0$af3a74cc@spiver> "Donna Guyton" <rac...@juno.com> writes:
>Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote in article
><61lo1u$2fb$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
(snip my queries about TWHs and racking)
>In the big lick division, or **racking** classes if you look
>very closely, the saddlebreds and walkers are in fact....pacing or doing a
>stepping pace.
I suspect you will sympathize when I say I don't particularly wish to
look at big lick stuff at all, let alone closely.
>I, or any of my other acquaintances into the walking horses, have never had
>a problem with running walks and canters.
I begin to get the picture here :-).
>To tell the truth, I have never heard the judges of the shows I go to ever,
>and I mean EVER, call for a canter gait. I have never heard it, and maybe
>that is why it is disappearing. All I have ever hear them ask for in the
>Big Lick and Flat Shod division is a show walk, slow rack, and a fast rack
>(which looks all the same to me, except for in the flat shod class). In
>the trail pleasure division they ask for a walk and a trail rack.
Relativist though I may be, I can't see that this does anybody much good.
A further query, then, if you'd be so kind--is the let's make TWHs rack
thing a more recent development? I had a bit more familiarity with
Walkers as a child and nobody was racking the ones I knew. Or is part of
this changing terminology for gaits, and "rack" is being used more
freely? For instance, I wonder if "trail rack" is what I knew as a
"singlefoot."
>I am no expert by no means, and I am sure that everyone has their own
>experiences with walkers, but what I speak is of what I see, learn, and do
>with walkers in horse shows, training, etc in SC.
Which is of interest to me, and I appreciate your info.
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
An Illinois Walking Person in Champaign, IL, USA
Emil Golen
Mike Burnett wrote:
My first horse was a 3 yr old Percheron/Throughbred. His trot left
something to be desired but his heart was as big as can be. He was able
to jump 3 1/2 ft. with me (235lbs) without a problem. He was very smart
and a blast on trail because he had excellent endurance and energy. If
trained correctly a warmblood can be light to the aids also. He stood
a magnificent 17 hands with the face like an Arab, I sure miss him. Good
luck finding one, you won't be disappointed!
Emil
MMcC
>I read somewhere that the Warmblood horse originated as a cross between
>Coldblood horses (Percheron, Clydesdale, etc.) and Hotblooded horses
>(Thoroughbreds & Arabs). If this is true, than you can get away with
>such a cross. You can have the build and disposition of the Percheron,
>with the riding ability, athleticism and intelligence of the
>Thoroughbred.
>
True enough Jaco, but the reality is a bit more complex. The warmbloods
have been fine tuned for 200 - 300 years now, with the recipe being
tweaked constantly, a little more eye of newt here and less leg of toad
there, till we arrive at the modern warmblood, which in truth has probably
closer to 3/4 TB blood in their veins. So it's a bit more complicated than
a straight TB-Draught cross. ( Though mind you the Irish Hunter, the Irish
version of WB Inc , is most often arrived at by a simple cross between a
TB and and an Irish Draught, with a complete obliviousness, as only we
could have, to registries and kuerings and the like, but in all honesty a
ID more of a heavy warmblood himself, than a hairy legs. What's even more
impressive is that this unscientific approach has produced some truly
great beasts, as the honour roles at Hickstead, Aachen, RDS, Badminton,
Burghley, will attest.)
>Off course you won't have the modern Warmblood (which is bred for
>generations now to perform), but you won't pay the same price for them
>either...
>
True enough, but don't expect them to perform the same either. You'd be
best off to take the offspring and cross it back again to a TB, and ya
might be getting closer, but I still wouldn't wait at home for Reiner
Klimke to come and beat door down, though you might hit upon a horse with
a decent jump to him, as some great showjumpers have had lowly beginnings,
though a deeper investigation of their pedigrees often suggests the hint
of greatness was always there.
>Any views on this?
>
>Jaco Fourie
>Republic of South Africa
>ahle...@hotmail.com
Just curious, Jaco, how is the health of the horse industry in RoSA now
that you've joined the ranks of civilised nations. Can we expect to see a
South African bred "Prix de L'Arc" winner someday?
Micheal Mac gCon Ulaidh
tobler
Donna Guyton wrote:
>
> Actually, IME, most Saddlebreds I have seen and ridden are pacers.
> Although there may be **true** rackers, I have never seen or ridden one,
> considering that the horse shows are equally occupied by as many walkers as
> saddlebreds. In the big lick division, or **racking** classes if you look
> very closely, the saddlebreds and walkers are in fact....pacing or doing a
> stepping pace.
>
A pace is a *two* beat lateral gait, not four. This is the gait of some
racing Standardbreds. If a Saddlebred is pacing, he is most definitely
*not* doing what he should. At times, if a horse is quite tired or is
just learning how to rack, he may slip into a pace, but the gaits that
you should be observing in the five-gaited Saddlebred classes *better*
be two beat unless they're trotting! :-)
The TWHs here in SE MI are mostly rackers, meaning that they are allowed
to do what comes naturally, although some are shod more heavily to
enhance their motion, etc. It is those who are shod in what most of us
would consider very abnormal ways (upright angles, huge packages, toe
bands, etc.) who do the big lick. This gait is extemely different than
a rack, although of the same cadence (left hind, left front, right hind,
right front). The rack is of fairly even footfalls, depending on the
build of the individual, and can be collected or extended, with the feet
traveling at normal heights. The big lick, OTOH, is a grotesque
alteration of this natural cadence, only performed after man's
persistant interference with what the horse would chose to do. The
result is an extreme reach of the hind legs, coupled with extreme height
and hovering of the fronts. This is sometimes achieved by causing
enough pain in the coronary or other foot area to make the horse not
want to place his front feet back on the ground. Hence, the four beats
are not even; the fronts are airborne longer than the hinds.
I don't know if showing the big lick Walkers has changed, but they used
to be asked to canter ... which is a wierd sight to behold. It looks
like a series of lunges or low rearing, over and over, making headway at
great expense to the horse's energy reserves. (You didn't hear me say
this, but both gaits are an absolute blast to ride.)
Wendy, rackin' & rollin', in MI
Mike Burnett
In article <01bcd585$0047bf80$0e42...@MichaelW.Johnson.wgcgps.com>,
By coincidence, I saw a TWH in action here in Yorkshire only last Sunday.
It prompted my posting re Percherons. This TWH was a mare, 5yo, small, but
my, was she busy, busy, busy. Her walk was determined and her second gear
quite extraordinary. She had been brought over from the States via Holland
(for training - apparently no one in UK could teach it that special gait)
because the guy who bought her couldn't take to the rising trot. Here's
the interesting bit. His wife (who claimed the mare after falling in love
with her) couldn't take to the peculiar gait. So, they had both brought it
to the school to see if the mare could be trained to move from walk
straight into canter for the wife. Now, I know, very confusing for ANY
horse but this little mare did it and both husband and wife went away
highly delighted.
This is the only example of the TWH I've seen and, to be honest, she was
too lightly built for me but very impressive. I doubt I shall ever see
another over here.
Mike.
joy miller
On Fri, 10 Oct 1997 12:25:50 +0000, Em...@kdi.com (MMcC) wrote:
. ( Though mind you the Irish Hunter, the Irish
>version of WB Inc , is most often arrived at by a simple cross between a
>TB and and an Irish Draught, with a complete obliviousness, as only we
>could have, to registries and kuerings and the like, but in all honesty a
>ID more of a heavy warmblood himself, than a hairy legs. What's even more
>impressive is that this unscientific approach has produced some truly
>great beasts, as the honour roles at Hickstead, Aachen, RDS, Badminton,
>Burghley, will attest.)
>Micheal Mac gCon Ulaidh
Top o' the mornin' to you Micheal.
The Irish Draught horse is indeed '' more of a heavy warmblood '', and
the successes of the ID / TB first cross are not so unscientific and
due to good luck, leprechauns and 4 leafed clovers as Micheal would
whimsically have you believe.
Quote from ' The Irish Draught Horse ' by Alex Fell
ISBN 0-85131-504-6 p84
'' The Irish Draught and the Thoroughbred are thus from common stock,
and have been selected as riding horses to live in roughly similar
environments, with athleticism consistently retained as a
priority.Where they diverge is that the Thoroughbred has additional
athleticism, speed and refinement, whereas the Irish Draught has
soundness, sense, strength and its associated power and jumping
ability. Many ( but not all ) Thoroughbreds have jumping ability too,
and these have traditionally been sought for crossing with Draught
mares. ''
and p 85
''Any overview of the development of modern breeds of horse highlights
the striking similarities between the continental warmbloods, such as
the Hanoverian, and the Irish Draught. ''
and p4
''Since the Department of Agriculture first recognised the sire of the
hunter, the Irish Draught type, in 1906, and admitted it to their
register of stallions in 1907, it has endeavoured to improve him and
as a result horse breeding generally. Owners were invited to submit
their stallions for inspection and veterinary examination, and this
was subsequently enforced by legislation to offer breeders sound
stallions of good conformation free from hereditary defects.
Inspection was later extended to mares.''
So its not strictly true to say the successes of the ID x TB are
achieved ''with complete obliviousness to registries, keurings and the
like''. Today the inspection standards for Registered Irish Draught
stallions are higher than ever, and in addition they are encouraged
(in the UK) to take the National Stallion Performance Test, wherein
they acquit themselves with credit alongside other performance breeds.
Joy Miller
tobler
tobler wrote:
> ... the five-gaited Saddlebred classes *better* be two beat unless they're trotting! :-)
There I go again. There should be a "not" in there after "better".
Does anyone else have a touchpad on their puter? I use my laptop and
the touchpad is so danged, well, *touchy* that when I stick the cursor
somewhere (as I did here to place a missed space between better and not)
it wipes out whole words if I accidentally select them because my finger
moved just the sliiiiightest little bit left or right. Otherwise, I
love it. Anybody else have the same problem?
Wendy, touching a nerve, in MI
Amanda Pelot
I have a team of 2000 pound 17 hand black Percherons geldings that I
use for riding (as well as driving). They are both wonderful, and
not at all sluggish. One of them can keep up with my TWH at a walk,
and the other one is very energetic and likes to trot along. They are
both smooth at the trot, and it sure is FUN riding a galloping
Percheron! Not to mention they are level headed and friendly and
beautiful :)
If you don't plan on really long rides often, and don't mind not
cantering and galloping all over the place (their feet really pound
the ground, so I would worry about soundness if used for lots of fast
excercise) then I would say go for it! I'm glad I did :)
BTW, mine go barefoot so there's not the extra farrier costs, but the
feed bills are a little higher.
Amanda Pelot
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/3894
Jorene Downs
tobler <wto...@tdi.net> wrote:
My new/replacement notebook has a touchpad. I find it very sloppy to
work with. It demands a precise cue, and like a well trained horse
doesn't respond correctly without that correct precise cue. I had
limited options because I *had* to replace my notebook on a few
hours notice for business purposes, or I would have avoided that
touchpad. I have yet to meet any serious computer user who likes it.
It is OK for fundamentals like "tap to advance a slide in the
presentation." For text or graphics work I usually plug in a
3-button mouse.
- - -
Jorene
just moseyin' down the California trails ... :)
Meet other rec.eq posters on:
http://www.psnw.com/~jcdowns/RecEq/RecEq.html
jkil...@mcia.com
In article <34427220...@news.psnw.com>,
jcd...@strategic-vision.com wrote:
>
> tobler <wto...@tdi.net> wrote:
> >Does anyone else have a touchpad on their puter?
> My new/replacement notebook has a touchpad. I find it very sloppy to
> work with. It demands a precise cue, and like a well trained horse
> doesn't respond correctly without that correct precise cue.
Dang it Jorene...I think ya hit on a new idea....touchpads for horses
<SEG>
Just hook it up to electrodes to their brain and touch R for right, L for
left, H for halt, W for walk, T for trot, C for canter...
Wow, just think of it...a whole new way of riding! Yo, Bill G.....are ya
listening?
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Donna Guyton
tobler <wto...@tdi.net> wrote in article <343EE1...@tdi.net>...
> Donna Guyton wrote:
> >
> > Actually, IME, most Saddlebreds I have seen and ridden are pacers.
> > Although there may be **true** rackers, I have never seen or ridden
one,
> > considering that the horse shows are equally occupied by as many
walkers as
> > saddlebreds. In the big lick division, or **racking** classes if you
look
> > very closely, the saddlebreds and walkers are in fact....pacing or
doing a
> > stepping pace.
> >
>
> A pace is a *two* beat lateral gait, not four. This is the gait of some
> racing Standardbreds.
Owning 5 Standardbreds, I do know what the pace is.
If a Saddlebred is pacing, he is most definitely
> *not* doing what he should.
I think what the saddlebreds and walkers are doing is a stepping pace where
one foot on one side will hit slightly before the other but not in the
1-2-3-4 beat motion. The shows that I am referring to are not sanctioned
shows, but are shows produced by the local riding clubs. That could be the
reason that there is a variety of ways the horses move in each class.
At times, if a horse is quite tired or is
> just learning how to rack, he may slip into a pace,
Exactly.
but the gaits that
> you should be observing in the five-gaited Saddlebred classes *better*
> be two beat unless they're trotting! :-)
>
> The TWHs here in SE MI are mostly rackers, meaning that they are allowed
> to do what comes naturally, although some are shod more heavily to
> enhance their motion, etc. It is those who are shod in what most of us
> would consider very abnormal ways (upright angles, huge packages, toe
> bands, etc.) who do the big lick. This gait is extemely different than
> a rack, although of the same cadence (left hind, left front, right hind,
> right front). The rack is of fairly even footfalls, depending on the
> build of the individual, and can be collected or extended, with the feet
> traveling at normal heights. The big lick, OTOH, is a grotesque
> alteration of this natural cadence, only performed after man's
> persistant interference with what the horse would chose to do. The
> result is an extreme reach of the hind legs, coupled with extreme height
> and hovering of the fronts. This is sometimes achieved by causing
> enough pain in the coronary or other foot area to make the horse not
> want to place his front feet back on the ground. Hence, the four beats
> are not even; the fronts are airborne longer than the hinds.
>
That is the class I am referring to. I will make this clear first.....I do
not approve of or do I show big lick horses. The gaits a foot movements of
these horses are like a pace or a stepping pace. The judges will call for
a show walk, rack, and fast rack and I have never, in the shows I go to,
seen one of these horses rack! My sister-in-law has a saddlebred that was
once shown big lick and she paces, paces, paces.....you can not make her
rack no matter how she's shod. The fetlock area of her front hooves are so
large.....you can even see the bones bulging of the sides of each hoof.
> I don't know if showing the big lick Walkers has changed, but they used
> to be asked to canter ... which is a wierd sight to behold. It looks
> like a series of lunges or low rearing, over and over, making headway at
> great expense to the horse's energy reserves. (You didn't hear me say
> this, but both gaits are an absolute blast to ride.)
>
In our local shows they are not asked to canter. I can't imagine seeing
one canter with those big pads on their feet. I kinda looks dangerous if
you ask me.......I'd hate for one of those padding jobs to sling off and
hit me in the head.
> Wendy, rackin' & rollin', in MI
>
Donna Guyton (wondering in SC)
Les Szalay
>Mike Burnett <mbur...@cix.co.uk> wrote in article
><memo.1997100...@mburnett.compulink.co.uk>...
>> The interest in Frisians has stimulated my long interest in the Percheron
>> as a saddle horse. During the nineteenth century, because of its ability
>> to trot for long periods and its busy walk, they were commonly used as
>> carriage horses and, at times, as saddle horses.
>> With late comers to riding as novices like myself, big, heavy and somewhat
>> unathletic, I look for enormous strength in a horse so as not to be
>> burdensome to it, steadiness, gentleness and, where speed is concerned,
>> the occasional gentle canter. I also look for a broad back with the
>> comfort of an armchair. I'm betting the Percheron would fill the bill.
>> Has anyone experience of this breed? Has anyone seen them under saddle?
>> Any society addresses or email?
>> Thanks for your time.
>> Mike.
I used to ride a percheron x anglo arab stallion who, in appearance,
looked like a pure percheron. He was very quiet and his back was
impossible to fall out of - someone described him once as "like riding
a sofa". I usually rode him bareback, often in a halter and he was
very comfortable and easy. I can't say he had a busy walk <g> but he
used to be a very good hunter so I'm told (he turns 30 this year).
The percheron x TBs are meant to be good. Unfortunately, this horse
throws pretty bad foals and the owner just keeps breeding him for
sentimental reasons. However, I have seen some very nice crosses
which end up looking warmbloodish, rather than bit of percheron, bit
of TB.
As for enormous strength as a saddle horse, as far as I know, the
percherons were the main choice of knights. They had to carry knights
in full armour into battle and in between wars, they ploughed the
fields.
Katherine (in Oz)
Judy Darwin
Mike Burnett wrote:
>
> The interest in Frisians has stimulated my long interest in the Percheron
> as a saddle horse. During the nineteenth century, because of its ability
> to trot for long periods and its busy walk, they were commonly used as
> carriage horses and, at times, as saddle horses.
> With late comers to riding as novices like myself, big, heavy and somewhat
> unathletic, I look for enormous strength in a horse so as not to be
> burdensome to it, steadiness, gentleness and, where speed is concerned,
> the occasional gentle canter. I also look for a broad back with the
> comfort of an armchair. I'm betting the Percheron would fill the bill.
> Has anyone experience of this breed? Has anyone seen them under saddle?
> Any society addresses or email?
> Thanks for your time.
> Mike.
Hi Mike,
My old horse (now retired) is a percheron thoroughbred cross, which
looks much more Percheron in type than thoroughbred. He had fantastic
paces for riding (did well in dressage) and the most wonderful
unflappable temperament. He still is very busy looking after the
younger horses and teaching them to trailer quietly. That is very costly
in petrol, lugging the big fellow around, but he is worth every cent we
spend as if anything upsets the other horse he just stands like a rock,
even when one had a major scrambling episode next to him. You can tie
him up at a competition with the younger horses and he will just stand
there and slumber quietly even with frantic activity all round. Such a
wonderful settling influence.
Beware- the reason why this bloke was retired at age 17 was not because
he was old as such- he had and still has plenty of energy. It was his
feet. Big heavy horses put a lot of strain on their feet, and he became
chronically footsore, and his flat feet were very prone to bruising. Not
suitable for rough trail riding, but the best horse for a nice canter in
the park.
So, good luck with your search for the ideal percheron- I would suggest
a cross bred like mine, (but get the vet to check the feet before
buying)
Regards,
Judy
Elizabeth Moon
Les Szalay wrote:
>
> >Mike Burnett <mbur...@cix.co.uk> wrote in article
> ><memo.1997100...@mburnett.compulink.co.uk>...
> >> as a saddle horse. During the nineteenth century, because of its ability
> >> to trot for long periods and its busy walk, they were commonly used as
> >> carriage horses and, at times, as saddle horses.
> >> With late comers to riding as novices like myself, big, heavy and somewhat
> >> unathletic, I look for enormous strength in a horse so as not to be
> >> burdensome to it, steadiness, gentleness and, where speed is concerned,
> >> the occasional gentle canter. I also look for a broad back with the
> >> comfort of an armchair. I'm betting the Percheron would fill the bill.
> >> Has anyone experience of this breed? Has anyone seen them under saddle?
> >> Any society addresses or email?
> >> Thanks for your time.
> >> Mike.
>
> looked like a pure percheron. He was very quiet and his back was
> impossible to fall out of - someone described him once as "like riding
> a sofa". I usually rode him bareback, often in a halter and he was
> very comfortable and easy. I can't say he had a busy walk <g> but he
> used to be a very good hunter so I'm told (he turns 30 this year).
> The percheron x TBs are meant to be good. Unfortunately, this horse
> throws pretty bad foals and the owner just keeps breeding him for
> sentimental reasons. However, I have seen some very nice crosses
> which end up looking warmbloodish, rather than bit of percheron, bit
> of TB.
>
> As for enormous strength as a saddle horse, as far as I know, the
> percherons were the main choice of knights. They had to carry knights
> in full armour into battle and in between wars, they ploughed the
> fields.
>
> Katherine (in Oz)
History raises its head...yes, the Percherons' ancestors were heavy
horses for knights in armor. But no, at the time they were doing so,
they were not plowhorses in the off season. Those whose horses are
high-level dressage or event horses will understand immediately that no
knight, whose life depended on his horse's condition and training, would
let peasants hitch it to a plow or wagon between wars. Horse ownership
was limited to those with the money to maintain a horse; big heavy horses
were so expensive that even knights rode other horses most of the time,
reserving the heavy warhorse for those few hours of actual combat (or
jousting.) In some parts of Europe, peasants were forbidden to ride
horses (any horses, let alone big horses.) Horses that fell into peasant
hands might well be slaughtered for meat; peasants were always hungry,
and a warhorse wasn't good for anything else. (Keeping in mind that the
training of a draft horse requires more than putting it in harness and
saying "Giddap!")
Most plow animals of the middle ages were oxen; some were draft-type
ponies; in the poorest areas, humans pulled the plows in teams (usually
because war had come through, destroying nearly all livestock.) The
evidence for this is in surviving records such as the Fabric Rolls of
Yorkminster where it's possible to find out exactly how many pairs of ox
shoes were paid for (and horse-shoes, where you can find any mentioned.)
Medieval land measurement, too, was based in most areas on the amount of
land which a pair of oxen could plough in a day (thus varying from one
region to another. The standardization was to use, not size.)
Draft horses are faster, of course--the shift to horses as the primary
draft animal even for farm chores allowed expansion to larger acreages
(and a tendency to redefine land measurement in size, rather than usage,
since horses made hash of the "one team in one day" standard). But in
some parts of Europe oxen were still the typical draft animal as late as
WWI. Cattle mature faster, and the nonworking relatives of the oxen are
giving milk or providing meat and leather. Horses are more expensive
(though they offer the potential for greater profit.) Thus it's the
wealthier landowners who can afford to breed draft horses, and maintain
them for their tenants.
After the heavy warhorse was no longer needed in war, the heavy horse
became available for other uses--in city drayage as well as in the
country for farm work. Breeding then concentrated on those elements
which made the horse more suitable for draft work (changes in body
proportion--in disposition--etc.) During the Enlightenment, European
rulers and governments began to take a 'scientific' interest in
agriculture, and began formal, intentional improvement of local
agricultural animals, including draft horses. Thus the French
government's interest in the heavy horses of the Perche region, and the
establishment of a stud. Horses became a product, to be both imported
and exported, as transportation of horses over long distances became more
reliable.
But I haven't seen any evidence at all that M. le Comte's war stallion
ever felt the pull of a collar on his shoulders in the rare spring when
no war threatened. On the contrary, M. le Comte would have been out in
the manege, practicing the maneuvers that would keep him alive.
Elizabeth
--
"A little raised number at the end of a statement is not an icon of
inerrancy." _British Medical Journal_
Michael W. Johnson
day,
> and they make good trail mounts for riders who want to participate in rides
> without having to stay in shape.
Well, aren't we high and mighty! The original poster mentioned an interest in
comfort and that he was an elderly novice. I suppose those of us who can't
aspire to your level of perfection should just eat our shotguns, huh?
> The main problem I have with gaited horses is that most of them are limited
when
> it comes to any kind of competition where you need a W/T/C/jump horse, and
for
> those of us who ride at least partially for exercise, they're just about
> useless.
Agreed. If you're one of those females whose idea of riding is going around
and around in an indoor ring wearing one of those silly-looking suits, don't
get a TWH. If you prefer to ride outdoors in jeans and a gimme cap, perhaps
carrying a flask of Wild Turkey against the rain and cold, you may be TWH
material. If you sometimes ride all day for several consecutive days (as at
a bird dog trial), eventually you'll own a gaited horse. The gym is for
exercise.
The TWH is for transportation.
> Fortunately, most of them can be taught to trot. :-)
Yeah, maybe, but it seems a lot like training the dog to chew the
furniture. :)
Mike J.
Houston, TX
CATHERINE ALEXANDRA PAFORT
Elizabeth Moon wrote <a bunch of fascinating and historically correct stuff, most of
which gets snipped for brevity>:
> History raises its head...yes, the Percherons' ancestors were heavy
> horses for knights in armor. But no, at the time they were doing so,
> they were not plowhorses in the off season.
In the middle ages a large vairety of different horses was known - horses for the road,
for the carriage, for the ladies...
> Horse ownership
> was limited to those with the money to maintain a horse;
In the late middle ages it was compulsory in some parts of Europe. I don't know if in
actual wording, but horses were necessary to plow and deliver work - so when the feudal
system got abolished many people got rid of their horses - FAST.
> big heavy horses
> were so expensive that even knights rode other horses most of the time,
> reserving the heavy warhorse for those few hours of actual combat (or
> jousting.)
A fully trained, grain-fed stallion is NOT the most comfortable and relaxing ride! It
was usual to have a 'travelling horse', lead the charger and thus keep him fresh for the
actual combat. The other problem is that although those horses could develop an
enourmous impact they did not have the strength to run long distances - nor the agility.
> Most plow animals of the middle ages were oxen; some were draft-type
> ponies; in the poorest areas, humans pulled the plows in teams (usually
> because war had come through, destroying nearly all livestock.)
As late as the 1950s there is evidence of COWS being used. Oxen are stronger, but
otherwise pretty useless...
> Horses are more expensive
> (though they offer the potential for greater profit.) Thus it's the
> wealthier landowners who can afford to breed draft horses, and maintain
> them for their tenants.
I've noticed tendencies, though - there are areas in Germany where keeping and breeding
horses is a tradition, and others where it's just not common. Not just a question of
having the land for it - personal preference.
> During the Enlightenment, European
> rulers and governments began to take a 'scientific' interest in
> agriculture, and began formal, intentional improvement of local
> agricultural animals, including draft horses. Thus the French
> government's interest in the heavy horses of the Perche region, and the
> establishment of a stud. Horses became a product, to be both imported
> and exported, as transportation of horses over long distances became more
> reliable.
Two factors have helped shape the draft horse as we know it now - the *development* of
heavy horses as a food source, leading to those grossly oversized, fat individuums you
can find in some breeds, and the emphasis on strength and pulling great weights at a
walk, instead of the more versatile 'older' draft breeds.
Catja,
spending too much time in the wrong sections of the library...
Deborah Stevenson
In <620eip$r...@drn.zippo.com> Kris Anderson <kand...@williams.edu> writes:
> Transportation for Wusses Horse? :-)
Hey, I'm a wuss, dammit, and I'll thank you to speak kindly of my
transportation!
(re trot)
> Seems like such a relief to the poor horse, though.
I would have thought so too, but it really does seem like a trot is
harder than the running walk for Velvet. She can do the RW when she's
stiff and she can do it in spite of what I'm doing, but I actually have
to be straight and forward and strong to get a trot from her. Good
education :-).
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Wuss transported in Champaign, IL, USA
Michael W. Johnson
> By coincidence, I saw a TWH in action here in Yorkshire only last Sunday.
> It prompted my posting re Percherons. This TWH was a mare, 5yo, small, but
<snip>
> This is the only example of the TWH I've seen and, to be honest, she was
> too lightly built for me but very impressive. I doubt I shall ever see
> another over here.
Sorry, Mike. I didn't notice the uk in your email address when I responded.
If I had, I'd have just kept quiet. You probably won't see many TWH over
there, at least, not at any reasonable price and not enough to give you
a good variety of choices.
Mike J.
Houston, TX
Robin Hemenway
On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, Elizabeth Moon wrote:
> > Mike Burnett wrote:
> > - SNIP -
> > > I'm betting the Percheron would fill the bill.
> > > Has anyone experience of this breed? Has anyone seen them under saddle?
>
>
> Since modern draft horses are bred for pulling (with the conformation
> that suits such work, not work under saddle), why not consider breeds
> (and types) that are bred to carry weight?
Actually, you're wrong...Percherons are used very commonly for
riding and are bred to carry weight. They are "light on their feet" for
their size, although I find them to be a little slow and their ambling
gait to feel a little too clumsy for my tastes...but then again, I'm into
jumping and cross-country.
---Robin
txh...@texcom-hood.army.mil
In article <Pine.GSO.3.95.971014...@dilbert.ucdavis.edu>,
I am adding my "two-cents" worth to the above comments. We had a
Percheron/TB that was a EXCELLENT riding horse. Jimmy was used for Fox
Hunting and show jumping. His strength and agility were remarkable.
Other Percherons I have worked with have also showed the great strength,
agility and calmness that their breed is known for. "Ambling" .. yes, at
first, but after working with them and their gaits, they can be a
excellent ride.
Roy Cantrell
Bill Kambic
Kris Anderson wrote:
>
> In article <01bcd585$0047bf80$0e42...@MichaelW.Johnson.wgcgps.com>, "Michael
> says...
> >
> >The horse I see recommended in books for elderly novice riders is the
> >Tennessee Walking Horse (TWH). Some of them are quite large, over
> >16hh, though not as large as a Percheron. They do have the advantage
> >of a smooth four-beat intermediate gait, the running walk, which they do
> >instead of a trot. The best of them have a smooth "rocking chair canter"
> >as well. On most trail rides I've seen, the TWH are out front and the
> >non-gaited horses bring up the rear. It's not that TWH are all that fast.
> >It's just that they can do that smooth running walk all day, without any
> >discomfort to the rider. TWH are also noted for their sweet dispositions.
> >You can probably guess what breed of horse I own.
> >
> >Mike J.
> >Houston, TX
>
Mike J. speaks truely (mostly<g>). After all, who REALLY tells the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth regarding their own
breed?<g>
> I agree that TWH and other gaited horses are very comfortable to ride all day,
> and they make good trail mounts for riders who want to participate in rides
> without having to stay in shape.
>
> The main problem I have with gaited horses is that most of them are limited when
> it comes to any kind of competition where you need a W/T/C/jump horse, and for
> those of us who ride at least partially for exercise, they're just about
> useless.
>
No, not really. The TWH can be as challenging or as easy as you want
him/her to be. As for athletic ability, they can participate in most
any discipline. Of course, the TWH is a "generalist" horse. It was, at
its roots, a farm horse that could pull a wagon or implement Mon. thru
Fri. (and go under saddle to take care of errands), take the family to
town on Sat., participate in a show or race on Sat. night, take the
family to church on Sun. AM, rest Sun. PM, and be ready to work on Mon.
AM (and repeat the cycle again for 25 years of so). The TWH can jump,
but will never beat a Thoroughbred show jumper. It can cut or work
cattle, but will never beat a good working QH. They can participate in
dressage competition, but will never beat a warm blood bred to the
dressage arena. Etc., etc., etc.
The TWH opens the door of equestrian activites to many who could not
otherwise participate, and permits many people with physical limitations
to continue to enjoy riding.
If you are riding for exercise, the TWH will probably not fit your bill.
It is a breed where the rider can be, essentially, a passenger. In
fact, some of us see this as a good reason NOT to permit people to learn
to ride on a TWH. We have always started our new students (adult and
4H) on trotting horses for the first couple of years in English tack.
That is much more demanding of the student, will teach them to develop a
good seat and balance, and will permit them to learn how to move with
the horse, not against it. Once the basics are mastered, then they may
move to a gaited horse.
> Fortunately, most of them can be taught to trot. :-)
>
> Kris
Most of our THW's will trot at leisure, and could be taught to trot
under saddle. There is a movement within the industry to become more
active in the dressage world, and a debate rages amoung THW people over
the necessity of teaching the trot. I have pretty much decided that
they should be taught to trot under saddle, as that will permit better
and truer collection and balance. This is NOT a popular position
("...after all, why buy the damn gaited horse if you are not going to
use the gait?") and the question has not at all been settled.
Regarding draft horses as saddle stock, I am generally skeptical. While
there will always be individuals that will go comfortably under saddle,
the draft horse of today is the product of a long period of selective
breeding for stock that can work long hours at low speeds in harness.
No consideration was given to performance under saddle at breeding time.
On that basis, I would not spend time looking for a "needle in a
haystack" but look to one of the larger saddle horse breeds.
Bill Kambic, Bright Star Farm, Kingston, TN
http://www.geocities.com/heartland/hills/1816
Believer in the Great Ambiguous Blessing:
"Dear Lord, for what we are about to receive, may we be truly thankful."
JUDI SCOTT
Mike Burnett wrote:
>
> The interest in Frisians has stimulated my long interest in the Percheron
> as a saddle horse. During the nineteenth century, because of its ability
> to trot for long periods and its busy walk, they were commonly used as
> carriage horses and, at times, as saddle horses.
> With late comers to riding as novices like myself, big, heavy and somewhat
> unathletic, I look for enormous strength in a horse so as not to be
> burdensome to it, steadiness, gentleness and, where speed is concerned,
> the occasional gentle canter. I also look for a broad back with the
> Has anyone experience of this breed? Has anyone seen them under saddle?
> Thanks for your time.
> Mike.
Mike,
Here in Pennsylvania every October there is something called THe
Challenge of the Breeds. Horses from 12 different breeds are invited to
participate in six events: Hunter pleasure, Hunter Hack (over jumps),
Western Pleasure, Driving, Western Riding (a specific pattern requiring
gait changes and lead changes at specific points in the pattern), and
Barrel Racing. Every year for the past 3 years a percheron named Meadow
Creek Jake has competed. Each year he has gotten better. THis year he
was able to win the Western riding with an almost perfect pattern. Over
all he came in 5th place. He out-jumped the quarterhorses and appaloosas
and several other breeds. At the Draft Horse show earlier in the week he
was named the champion saddle horse.
There is a Percheron who shows regurlarly in the show series that we
hold on our farm. He goes western and hunter as well as drives. He is an
excellent saddle horse. Percherons and percheron-crosses are fox-hunted
in our area also.
Hope this is a help
Judi
Watergap Equestrian Center:
http://www.epix.net/~watergap/
Mailto:wate...@epix.net
Updated 9/5/97
Deborah Stevenson
In <01bcdafe$50f65300$0e42...@MichaelW.Johnson.wgcgps.com> "Michael W. Johnson" <mjoh...@jamyourspam.com> writes:
>Promoters of the TWH claim that the RW is an energy saving gait. The true
>RW is exactly the same gait as a walk, but at 5-8 mph rather than 3-4 mph
>and with a little overstride (not overreach) thrown in. (That's where the head
>nod comes from; all horses nod twice per four beat cycle in a walk, no?) If
>the claim is true, the TWH should do better at the RW. Perhaps Bill, or
>someone, can cite a scientific study.
No scientific study, but the *big* difference between an RW and a walk,
AFAIK, is that the running walk has suspension, like a trot, which the walk
does not--IOW, there are moments when no foot is on the ground. I think
it's closer to the trot than the walk in energy loss for that reason.
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Who either runs or walks in Champaign, IL, USA
Bill Kambic
Better late than never!<g>
IMHO, teaching the TWH to trot (using a specific cue) will not injure
the quality of the RW.
Something to remember, is that the TWH has TWO soft gaits, the Flatfoot
Walk (usually called the flatwalk or FW) and the Runningwalk (RW). The
FW is a slow, even 4 beat gait that produces a speed of 4-5 mph. It is
a "distance" gait. The horse produces a clear 1-2-3-4-1-2-3-4 pattern
of foot falls. A well conditioned horse can do this gait for hours on
end, leading to a great number of miles covered. While smooth, this
gait occationally has a slight "rolling" motion. Overstride here is
modest. It is probably the "highest efficiency" TWH gait. (NOTE: An
experienced TWH distance rider, Mr. Truman Prevatt, has suggested that
the TWH gallop is a somewhat more efficient gait, and that we TWH owners
are missing out on a good thing by not working our horses more at speed.
I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Prevatt's superior experience in
this area.<g>)
The RW is "speed" gait, delivering 9-10 mph. It is also (ideally) is an
even, 4 beat gait, but with a faster "cadence." The rider of the well
conditioned horse uses this gait to cover a moderate distance quickly.
This gait is best suited to prepared surfaces (maintained trails, etc.).
There is a third gait that sometimes shows up here, the rack. It is
also a smooth, 4 beat lateral gait that permits greater speed than the
RW. I have heard of horses that can rack in excess of 20 mph. I have
never personally seen one.
There are some limits on these gaits. On really rough ground, the
lateral gait MAY not be as safe as a diagonal gait. However, on any
kind of trail, the FW will give you the distance, the RW the speed.
A common mistake found amongst TWH riders is a failure to maintain the
distinction between the FW and the RW. At the last NHSC show I
attended, there was virtually NO difference between the speeds of the
two gaits by horses in the ring. This statement applies to big lick,
plantation, and flat shod horses, alike.
A second common error is trying to get too much speed from the RW. The
true RW is a square gait, with feet leaving and striking the ground in
an even sequence (1-2-3-4-1-2-3-4). Many THW's today (due to some poor
breeding practices in the big lick/plantation communities) are very pacy
(rather like a pacing Standardbred). This results in an uneven gait
(1-2--3-4-1-2--3-4). It still, however, might be smooth. A perfectly
square TWH can be made to pace (and/or rack) if you push him through the
RW by demanding more speed than the square RW can produce. This will
often result in loss of natural head nod and increasing latterality
(great word, what?<gg>). The gait may become quite rough, with lots of
roll.
Dr. Womac is correct on Roan Allen. He was very multigaited and could
perform each on cue.
Some have maintained that the trot is a more efficient gait, and for the
TWH that trots at leisure, should be the highest efficiency gait for
that horse. I have no opinion on the relative efficiency of the FW (or
any other single foot gait) vs. the trot. I know of no studies that
have attempted to compare the two. But just because a TWH trots at
leisure (suggesting that this is the horse's own selection for max
efficiency) without the encumberance of tack and rider does not mean
that when we add tack and rider the equation stays the same. Again, I
know of no studies in this area. I guess it must just be considered an
open question.
Most TWH owners dislike to trot. After all, we ride these horses
precisely BECAUSE they are smooth and comfortable!
Well, I'm sure that you, Dear Readers, now know more about the arcane
subject of TWH gaits than you ever wanted to know!<g> The best
characteristic of the breed, IMO (nothing humble about this one<g>) is
their very easy going nature and thier desire to please. Particularly
for someone with a physical limitation (like a bad back) the TWH is
ideal.
If anyone has any other questions, please e-mail me.
John T. Klausner
I have no recent experience with TWH, but long long ago when I did,
they either gaited or they didn't. They would also trot and pace as
foals, and the process of training was to restrict and gradually
eliminate the tendency to trot and pace. Once trained, they would
generally TW all the time, whether under saddle or not. The TW was
unquestionably easier on both horse and rider. The rack that
Saddlebreds did, on the other hand, was a strenuous energy consuming
gait for the horse, though it was terrific for the rider. I have some
confusion, though, on the saddlebred inbetween gait...the five gaits
are: walk, trot, rack, canter and ???? Singlefoot? runwalk? I have
trouble keeping clear in my mind the footfall in the different gaits-
Tennesee Walk, single foot, Missouri Foxtrot, ..are there others?
SueK
In <627nhb$avg$1...@infoserv.aber.ac.uk> ca...@aber.ac.uk (CATHERINE
ALEXANDRA PAFORT) writes:
>
>Kris Anderson wrote in reply to Bill:
>
>>>Most of our THW's will trot at leisure, and could be taught to trot
>>>under saddle.
>>>I have pretty much decided that
>>>they should be taught to trot under saddle, as that will permit
better
>>>and truer collection and balance.
>
>A friend of mine, who rides Icelandics is of the opinion that the
horse should
>FIRST be schooled in walk, trot and canter, and then in toelt and (if
present)
>pace.
>
>>Another question I have is that when it comes to endurance, would a
TWH be
>>likely to hold up better if he covered the distance at the RW, or
trot--or do
>>you think that may be another one of those things that is dependent
upon each
>>horse's individual abilities?
>
>At the trot, IMHO. The horse , left to his own devices, is switching
gaits
>(from walk to trot to canter) to conserve energy. While *some* will
adopt a
>different way of going, and can be taught to do so under saddle, this
is not
>the most efficient way of moving.
>
>Catja
>
Jackie Lazenby
I just attended an American Warmblood kuring (not sure how it's spelled) on
10/12 in Plymouth, Ca. where a client who bred her Percheron mare to my
Arab stallion took the filly offspring to be rated. This was a new
experience for me, but I am delighted to report that she had the highest
score in her group and was rated as first premium. The evaluators seemed
alittle surprised at her look and ability. (I have to admit it wouldn't
have been a cross I would have tried) There is a picture of her ( not a
good one I'm afraid) on my web page www.netcom.com/~jlazenby in the baby
pics. BTW she also has a 2 year old half sister (purebred Percheron) that
she is now riding and loves her to death. It seems that this cross of TB or
Arab on Percherons is creating some interest.
Robin Hemenway wrote in message ...
>On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, Elizabeth Moon wrote:
>
>> > Mike Burnett wrote:
>> > - SNIP -
Sandy Cooper
Deborah Stevenson wrote:
>
> Hokay, sorry to follow myself up (sort of like chasing myself around in
> circles), but between a bit of research and some helpful private email
> I've come to the conclusion that there are three possible explanations
> for my confusion about what the running walk consists of and what my
> mount is doing.
>
> They are:
> 1) I'm right and everybody else in the world, including the horses, is
> wrong (I confess this one's my favorite)
> 2) I'm not actually feeling a moment of suspension after all
> 3) What I'm thinking is a running walk is actually what you all term a rack.
>
> Despite the obvious attractions of #1, I think that #3 is my current
> hypothesis. I shall investigate further to attempt to discover just what
> those legs are doing (which obviously I should have known anyway) and
> report back.
>
> Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
> Yearning for infallibility in Champaign, IL, USA
Actually, CalPoly Pomona has a research grant and is doing work on the
most efficient equine gait. I know at least one of the graduate student
lurks on this group, but refuses to post. Charnie, if you are out
there, this discussion is what the best of this group is about,and we
would all benefit from your contribution. The group was working with
arabs - I know about it because one of the students helped rehab my TWH
with the bowed tendon. They were looking for (sound) gaited horses,
especially TWHs, about a year ago to put in the study. I expect a
publication at some point from the study and will try to find out where
it will appear. Interesting stuff!!
Sandy Cooper
CATHERINE ALEXANDRA PAFORT
Michael W. Johnson
Kris Anderson wrote in article <625rng$h...@drn.zippo.com>...
> In article <34461F...@ix.netcom.com>, Bill says...
>
> >Most of our THW's will trot at leisure, and could be taught to trot
>
Seeing no response from Bill, I'll submit my unsolicited opinion in hopes
that he'll either correct or support it.
> In your opinion, would it likely to be detrimental to the quality of the
horses'
> running walk if a TWH were taught to trot?
Upon reflection, no, provided that the horse is taught a distinct queue for
each gait. According to Dr. Bob Womack in _The Echo of Hoofbeats_,
foundation sire Roan Allen F-38 could do seven distinct gaits, and knew
the queue for each. Presumably the pace, trot, and running walk were
among these. Am I gonna teach _my_ horses to trot? Hell, no!
> Another question I have is that when it comes to endurance, would a TWH be
> likely to hold up better if he covered the distance at the RW, or trot--or do
> you think that may be another one of those things that is dependent upon each
> horse's individual abilities?
Promoters of the TWH claim that the RW is an energy saving gait. The true
RW is exactly the same gait as a walk, but at 5-8 mph rather than 3-4 mph
and with a little overstride (not overreach) thrown in. (That's where the head
nod comes from; all horses nod twice per four beat cycle in a walk, no?) If
the claim is true, the TWH should do better at the RW. Perhaps Bill, or
someone, can cite a scientific study.
Mike J.
Houston, TX
Deborah Stevenson
<627pev$ouj$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <344788...@ix.netcom.com>
In <344788...@ix.netcom.com> Bill Kambic <wka...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>Deborah Stevenson wrote:
>>
><snipped>
>>
>>...the running walk has suspension, like a trot, which the walk
>> does not--IOW, there are moments when no foot is on the ground. I think
>> it's closer to the trot than the walk in energy loss for that reason.
>>
>Well, Deborah, "gottcha!"<g> There is no suspension in the TWH
>runningwalk. It is a "single foot gait" (with at least one foot always
>on the ground).
Then I'm gotten indeed :-). My only point of info only does it when I'm
on her, so it's hard for me to check, but it sure seems like there's
one--or, to be more accurate, several. Aren't we talking the same
footfall order as a flat walk? Are overreach and speed really the only
difference between the two gaits?
It's also possible I've been understanding "singlefoot" wrong (I'll check
the OED when I go home)--I thought it indicated independent use of each
foot, as opposed to the diagonal movement involved in trot and canter
(with the off-lead pairing). Clearly I need all the gaited trivia I can get!
>You suggest an interesting point: Does the moment of suspension rob the
>trot of efficiency? Perhaps some others out there in Cyberland have
>something to say on this!<g>
Dunno, but if you don't have suspension you can't go very fast :-).
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
On the rack in Champaign, IL, USA
Bill Kambic
Deborah Stevenson wrote:
>
<snipped>
>
>...the running walk has suspension, like a trot, which the walk
> does not--IOW, there are moments when no foot is on the ground. I think
> it's closer to the trot than the walk in energy loss for that reason.
>
Well, Deborah, "gottcha!"<g> There is no suspension in the TWH
runningwalk. It is a "single foot gait" (with at least one foot always
on the ground).
You suggest an interesting point: Does the moment of suspension rob the
trot of efficiency? Perhaps some others out there in Cyberland have
something to say on this!<g>
Bill Kambic, Bright Star Farm, Kingston, TN
Joel B Levin
In <344788...@ix.netcom.com>,
Bill Kambic <wka...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
:You suggest an interesting point: Does the moment of suspension rob the
:trot of efficiency? Perhaps some others out there in Cyberland have
:something to say on this!<g>
I suppose if you consider that the passage and piaffe are the trot movements
with the most suspension, that they are pretty low efficiency -- I'd have to
say that the piaffe has zero efficiency -- a lot of energy to go no where at
all!
/J
--
Nets: le...@bbn.com | "There were sweetheart roses on Yancey Wilmerding's
or j...@levin.mv.com| bureau that morning. Wide-eyed and distraught, she
POTS: (617)873-3463 | stood with all her faculties rooted to the floor."
ARS: KD1ON | -- S. J. Perelman
Ignatzmom
>Dunno, but if you don't have suspension you can't go very fast :-).
Well, there's suspension and suspension <g> In a rack there is a point when
both front and then again both hind are off the ground, but at least one foot
is in contact with the ground at all times. I have personally clocked a racker
at 35 mph. I understand they did one at Texas AM a long time ago at 48 (but
ROwdy was sort of an exception)
Now, a rack is hard on a horse and not very efficient in terms of energy used.
A good runningwalk (which is a LOT slower than a rack, really not much form
past 8 mph) is probably not as efficient for the horse as a trot or even a
pace (ugh) witness that very tired walkers will go into one or the other
unless "coached" out of it.
I'm fascinated about the Cal Poly study -- hope it's more complete than the one
with the ponies that determined that horses always choose the most efficient
gait for themselves. That was a major disappointment to those of use wanting
an answer on the "best" (in terms of efficiency and future soundess) gait of
those available.
Lee, still riding after all these years.
tobler
John T. Klausner wrote:
> The rack that Saddlebreds did, on the other hand, was a strenuous energy consuming
> gait for the horse, though it was terrific for the rider. I have some
> confusion, though, on the saddlebred inbetween gait...the five gaits
> are: walk, trot, rack, canter and ????
Actually, when a SB is shod like a normal horse and not required to
travel above level when it's not natural for that individual (knee
motion above parallel to the ground), then the rack is no more strenuous
than for any other breed which can perform it without artificial
devices.
Years ago, the fourth gait in SB classes could be one of several, left
up to the rider. It was often, e.g., a fox trot (4-beat *diagonal*
gait). But nowadays, it's a 4-beat lateral gait called the slow gait,
which is not a whole heck of a lot different in the eye of the layman
than the rack. It's supposed to be slower (surprise, surprise) than the
rack and with great animation. It's really a gorgeous gait. When told
to "rack on", the class should rack faster but *without losing form*.
I.e., head carriage should not falter nor leg motion get sloppy. It's
not supposed to turn into a racking race but the fact is, that's what
naturally occurs and it's the most thrilling of anything equine that I
believe most horse-loving spectators can behold. It's definitely the
most thrilling thing I know of from a rider's point of view!
Wendy, who believes four legs are better than two, in MI
tobler
Bill Kambic wrote:
>
> Deborah Stevenson wrote:
> >
> <snipped>
> >
> >...the running walk has suspension, like a trot, which the walk
> > does not--IOW, there are moments when no foot is on the ground. I think
> > it's closer to the trot than the walk in energy loss for that reason.
> >
> Well, Deborah, "gottcha!"<g> There is no suspension in the TWH
> runningwalk. It is a "single foot gait" (with at least one foot always
> on the ground).
Right, Bill. Sorry, Deborah. :-) All of these gaits that we're talking
about have the same cadence; left hind, left front, right hind, right
front. They are a 4-beat lateral gait which, even when performed at the
utmost speed (like a Saddlebred's "rack on" or an Icelandic's tolte
(sp)), always provides one foot on the ground at all times.
> You suggest an interesting point: Does the moment of suspension rob the
> trot of efficiency? Perhaps some others out there in Cyberland have
> something to say on this!<g>
The trot is, in most cases, faster than the rack (the generic word I'll
use for simplicity, understanding that each breed has its own
terminology) and, IMO, offers more speed for the energy required. The
very fact that there *is* a moment of suspension allows the horse
opportunity to propel himself through the air, unhampered by his
physical limitations of "stretch".
If the question then is, does this upward thrust of body weight to
achieve suspension require more energy than merely propelling body
weight forward, I would say no. Consider Dr. Matthew MacKay Smith's
(endurance rider and vet) observations in Equus magazine many years ago
which stated that hard ground allows a horse to trot as he was designed;
for tendons and ligaments to spring back nearly effortlessly, giving the
horse the ability to trot mile after mile with little fatigue.
Without a phase of suspension for the horse to spring back *to*, it
would seem that the rack would cause the horse to absorb what could have
been productive return-energy. On the simplest of analytical terms,
let's compare ourselves with our equines. Have you ever tried to race a
companion at a walk? The two of you walk just as fast as you can until
your legs feel like rubber at which point you both break into not only
laughter but, I'll betcha, a *jog*! It is easier for a biped, at least,
to make speed at a gait which has a suspension phase. And if it's
easier, it can be performed longer and that translates into efficiency.
BTW, my Saddlebreds can absolutely fly at the trot (one was clocked
*post-founder* at 25mph), which is why I'll never forget the only
racking horse (a little 14.3h TWH) who could ever keep up with my
horses' trots (my horses' racks could never touch him). He executed
what was probably the most proper and efficient rack I've ever seen.
His neck and head were motionless, as was his entire back, while his
little legs just torqued along like pistons. With the old-fashioned
roan coloring, complete with 4 stockings, *and* traveling above level,
he was a sight to behold and I was fortunate to be his regular riding
companion for some time. Pasos and Rocky Mt horses, to name a few, have
this very rapid leg movement too, but this horse could also reach beyond
belief.
Wendy in MI
Eiyan
> All of these gaits that we're talking
>about have the same cadence; left hind, left front, right hind, right
>front. They are a 4-beat lateral gait
What gaits?? I'm curious because (other than the pace) I've never know the
footfalls of the "gaits" of gaited horses.
Ann
Deborah Stevenson
In <19971019170...@ladder02.news.aol.com> igna...@aol.com
(Ignatzmom) writes:
>Ok, gaits 101 coming up!
(snip of extremely helpful specifics)
>A rack (etc) is an
> even 1-2-3-4 beat gait with a one foot, two foot support, suspension between
> each set of transverse pairs.
Okay, I may be on the verge of a breakthrough here (and thanks for the
very useful paragraph); perhaps some kind soul would be willing to walk
me through, if you'll pardon the expression, the specifics I'm still
fuzzy on.
Let's focus on the suspension between each set of transverse pairs, because
I'm not sure I'm understanding that as you mean it. To me, suspension
indicates a moment when all four feet *are* off the ground, despite
previous statements that that doesn't happen at the rack. And since
"transverse" means "across," I would think that meant hind- and
forequarter pairings and a moment of suspension between the hind pair and
the fore pair. What I'm getting, when I walk around the room with your
described footfalls, is a moment of suspension in one set between *each in a
transverse pair.* Does that work, or am I not gaited :-)?
I *am* finally grasping the point of cadence and footfall--it's not just
when they put the feet down, it's when they pick them up. If the rack is
"one hind foot on ground followed by two lateral, followed by one front foot
on ground followed by two diagonal," those hind feet are coming up off the
ground a lot earlier in the cycle than they are in the walk.
>As to Rowdy -- his exploits were mentioned in Equus a long time ago -- I will
> have to look up the exact date. Article was titled "Here comes Rowdy" and
> talked about the little horse with the flying legs -- I believe he was a
> Kentucky Mountain. From personal experience, I think the rack is faster than
> the trot for those horses that do it naturally and well --isn't the pace is
> faster than the trot in the sulky racing world?
Yep. And I could envision a horse being faster at the rack than at the
trot (though I suspect it couldn't be sustained as long), but 48 mph
would mean faster than any gallop as well. I'll see if I can find the
article--I think I've got access to a database that indexes Equus.
>I also think I read somewhere
> in the biomechanics world that you went faster when you were in contact with
> the ground than if you had long moments of suspension -- sort of like downhill
> skiers who lose time when they're airborne. Not sure about this.
And jumpers can lose time in the air as well. But I hope some
engineering type (hint, hint) or physicist will comment, because
obviously suspension must assist speed in humans otherwise walking would
be faster than running. And while one can of course have a fast walk
quicker than a slow run, fast walks lose to fast runs every time. I
suspect it relates to the earlier suggestion about harnessing of energy,
but I'm way out of my depth here.
Gaits 101 is exactly what I'm looking for, so I'm hoping this continues
for a bit :-).
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Ambling across the keyboard in Champaign, IL, USA
tobler
The thread had gotten off onto the various executions of a 4-beat
lateral gait; first with regards to TWHs, which Bill Kambic and others
explain so well, and eventually into SBs.
The sequence in which a horse's four feet fall is called the cadence. I
see Lee disagreeing with me here but that's the terminology I learned
years ago.
Probably the best way to illustrate gaits is to draw four circles, each
the corner of a rectangle, representing the soles of a horse's feet as
you look down "through" him. Then you stick a number in them in order
of their placement during a particular gait. E.g., for a canter on the
right lead, the circle at the bottom left would be #1, the bottom right
and top left circles would both be #2, and the top right circle would be
#3.
To answer your question on gaited horses, first of all, the pace is
usually not considered one of the gaits of a gaited riding horse. It is
the 2-beat lateral gait of some Standardbreds and is faster than the
trot. Although it is, indeed, the gait which was contributed by
Canadian Pacers into the recipe for a SB during the last century which
allowed the SB to develop a lateral gait, and is ridden by many who buy
pacers off the track. A gaited horse might pace when he's tired or just
learning his 4-beat lateral gait, but he's not supposed to. This
business of a stepping pace is not really a pace because it's not 2
beat. It's 4, but the horse is using his shoulder and hip very nearly
in unison and his footfalls are very close together on that side.
Secondly, in regards to your question, the gaits range from the rack of
the SB and, years later, the TWH; the fino, corto, and largo (slow,
med., & fast) of the Paso Fino and I'm guessing the Peruvian, although
they may have different names; the tolte (or toelt?) which is the fast
rack of the Icelandic horse who must have names for his slower speeds of
the same cadence; the big lick and plantation walk of the TWH (as well
as rack); the amble, running walk, and single foot of the old time SBs,
TWHs of then and now, other breeds and any grade horse who gaits; to the
fox trot of the Missouri Fox Trotter and some others including SBs of
yore, which is a 4-beat diagonal gait, not lateral. I'm sure others out
there can add to this list but, just to give you a leg up on the gaits
of gaited horses, these are the most common terms for gaited horses on
American turf.
What differentiates them from eachother is the *way* the horses execute
the lh-lf-rh-rf cadence as well as the timing between footfalls. The SB
racks with a motionless headset, level back, high leg motion, and even
tempo. The TWH plantation walks with his head bobbing, his hips loose,
and lots of reach. The Pasos' heads have a steady set, they paddle
(which keeps their movement under the saddle to a minimum), and they
cover ground by taking many rapid steps. Etc, etc.
It's a fascinating subject and one that is most fun studied from the
back of one of these wonderful breeds! One of my greatest joys is to
put a "regular" rider on one of my SBs and head down the roads. First
they're impressed with the powerful trot. Then, after I explain how to
shift gears, they can't believe the speed, power, yet smoothness of the
rack. They're absolutely thrilled. One gal simply came out to try my
saddle before buying it. After three miles she wanted the *horse* too!
Wendy, enjoying the best of both worlds with five-gaited SBs, in MI
tobler
Deborah Stevenson wrote:
>
> In <19971018163...@ladder02.news.aol.com> igna...@aol.com
> (Ignatzmom) writes:
>
> >>Dunno, but if you don't have suspension you can't go very fast :-).
>
> >Well, there's suspension and suspension <g> In a rack there is a point when
> > both front and then again both hind are off the ground, but at least one foot
> > is in contact with the ground at all times. I have personally clocked a racker
> > at 35 mph. I understand they did one at Texas AM a long time ago at 48 (but
> > ROwdy was sort of an exception)
>
> of 20 seconds is 45 mph (QHs are probably faster there, but I'm not
> sufficiently familiar with their times). And presumably we're talking
> something he could sustain for at least 20 seconds. But if you've got a
> pointer to a document describing it more fully, I could still be convinced.
I find 48mph pretty incredible, too. I've ridden either *with* or *on*
horses who were state champion speed rackers and they were nowhere near
that fast. I think for a Standardbred to qualify, he has to trot or
pace, not sure which, somewhere around 2 minutes for a mile. That's
30mph (average, yes, but not that far off their sprint speed I think)
and, having ridden many StdBds off the track, both trotters and pacers,
I can tell you, they're faster than any racker I've known. Also, I've
ridden with many rackers over the years and my SBs nearly always trot
faster, and *for sure* we're not breaking the sound barrier like that.
> However, what's confusing me now is that I could have sworn a previous
> post said that the rack *does* have a moment of suspension. I think I'm
> going to have to go webpage hunting and come back to this topic.
This thing is getting way too complicated. I agree with you, Deborah;
suspension is a moment of no feet on the ground ... and this a rack by
any name does *not* have. That's one of the reasons for its smooth feel
in the saddle - no jarring landings.
Wendy; no expert, just speaking from experience, in MI
> Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
> Inefficiency expert in Champaign, IL, USA
Mary J. McHugh
Deborah Stevenson wrote:
> And jumpers can lose time in the air as well. But I hope some
> engineering type (hint, hint) or physicist will comment, because
> obviously suspension must assist speed in humans otherwise walking would
> be faster than running. And while one can of course have a fast walk
> quicker than a slow run, fast walks lose to fast runs every time. I
> suspect it relates to the earlier suggestion about harnessing of energy,
> but I'm way out of my depth here.
Where is Tom Ivers when you need him? :-} This sounds right up his
alley. I would suspect that this situation is one of those old
maximization problems you got in grammar school math. You know the
ones... you have a choice of routes where the faster road is longer but
the shorter road is slower and you have to figure out which one will get
you to the destination the quickest. Obviously with a moment of
suspension, you also get a longer but slower stride. With no
suspension, you get a shorter, faster stride. If you maximize for
speed, you probably get an answer somewhere between the two extremes.
I missed the harnessing of energy suggestion. Were we talking momentum?
> Gaits 101 is exactly what I'm looking for, so I'm hoping this continues
> for a bit :-).
>
> Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
> Ambling across the keyboard in Champaign, IL, USA
Mary "talking the walk" McHugh
moc.mbi.nostaw@hguhcm
John Nagle
Mike Burnett wrote:
> The interest in Frisians has stimulated my long interest in the Percheron
> as a saddle horse. During the nineteenth century, because of its ability
> to trot for long periods and its busy walk, they were commonly used as
> carriage horses and, at times, as saddle horses.
> With late comers to riding as novices like myself, big, heavy and somewhat
> unathletic, I look for enormous strength in a horse so as not to be
> burdensome to it, steadiness, gentleness and, where speed is concerned,
> the occasional gentle canter. I also look for a broad back with the
> Has anyone experience of this breed? Has anyone seen them under saddle?
horses, and I once owned one. They're interesting animals, with a
little Arab blood which makes them livelier and smarter than the other
pure draft breeds. The trot is smooth, but faster gaits are choppy.
Getting a full draft to extend takes months of hard work; they're built
to take short strides, and while they can be taught to stretch out, it's
not easy.
Percheron/TB crosses are nice saddle and driving animals, as well
as being good field hunters. That's a common cross; you can find
those.
I wouldn't recommend either for a novice rider. None of the
pure Percherons I've ridden were very tolerant of novice riders.
A big novice might want to go for a big old Western-trained quarter horse,
rather than anything exotic.
John Nagle
Deborah Stevenson
>The thread had gotten off onto the various executions of a 4-beat
>lateral gait; first with regards to TWHs, which Bill Kambic and others
>explain so well, and eventually into SBs.
And I need more! More, I tell you!
>The sequence in which a horse's four feet fall is called the cadence. I
>see Lee disagreeing with me here but that's the terminology I learned
>years ago.
In musical terms, "cadence" would be the rhythm, so Lee's term is closer
to that usage. Not like that makes it better, but for novices such as
myself that might be how we hear the word.
>Probably the best way to illustrate gaits is to draw four circles, each
>the corner of a rectangle, representing the soles of a horse's feet as
>you look down "through" him. Then you stick a number in them in order
>of their placement during a particular gait. E.g., for a canter on the
>right lead, the circle at the bottom left would be #1, the bottom right
>and top left circles would both be #2, and the top right circle would be
>#3.
Right, but what Lee was just going into, and what is the area I most need
succor in, is when the feeet pick *up* again. The above description doesn't
clue me in to the moment of suspension between #3 and #1, for instance.
Or to get to the nitty-gritty, stating the walk as near hind, near fore,
off hind, off fore is perfectly accurate but insufficient, as it could
also apply to a gait where the horse leapt from near hind to near fore
and to off hind, etc.,; or, apparently, to just about any of the gaits
we're discussing because the feet are hitting in the same order. If I've
misunderstood this, please, someone, correct me--my education in Gaits
101 is on the line here.
>to the
>fox trot of the Missouri Fox Trotter and some others including SBs of
>yore, which is a 4-beat diagonal gait, not lateral.
Which I've heard before, and which I also find confusing, largely because
(if I understand the footfalls--not rises :-)--correctly) its pattern of
near hind, off fore, off hind, near fore seems as lateral as the other
when you "start" from a different place in the cycle and describe it as
off fore, off hind, near fore, near hind. Perhaps it's more obviously
diagonal when you're familiar with the cadence/rhythm, as the diagonal
pair is closer together time-wise than the lateral pair? (Yes, I
understand that if you look at it laterally that the hind/fore precedence
is reversed, but they're still next to each other.) But at least I grasp
the fact that there's a gait where the footfalls are different.
>What differentiates them from eachother is the *way* the horses execute
>the lh-lf-rh-rf cadence as well as the timing between footfalls. The SB
>racks with a motionless headset, level back, high leg motion, and even
>tempo. The TWH plantation walks with his head bobbing, his hips loose,
>and lots of reach. The Pasos' heads have a steady set, they paddle
>(which keeps their movement under the saddle to a minimum), and they
>cover ground by taking many rapid steps. Etc, etc.
I was fairly aware of those differences, but I think Lee's point about
the cadence and the foot rise (not your term, Lee, sorry) makes a big
difference too, because it makes a big difference to how the balance of
the horse shifts throughout the cycle.
>It's a fascinating subject and one that is most fun studied from the
>back of one of these wonderful breeds!
Well, I don't expect you'll be sending one down to me, but I hope you'll
at least continue to be fascinated enough to put up with my questions
until I get the hang of it :-).
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Alligaiter in Champaign, IL, USA
Mary Rossano
Hey Wendy, did you happen to go to the big (Great Lakes International)
draft horse show this weekend? It was *huge* - there were over 800
horses there.
While I was at the show, I saw a woman riding a Percheron in a flat seat
saddle. The horses was an excellent mover, with lots of animation at
both ends. It looked quite nice in the bridle too, although its neck
wasn't long enough to set up like a light horse.
I must say the ride looked like it would take some getting used to. The
back of the horse was very broad, and the rider did seem to be bouncing
as much as she was posting.
Mary Rossano
Laura Friedman
I read a book that had a few chapters on gaits in both horses and humans
that explained these phenomena. The book is "The Nature of Horses," by
Stephen Budiansky, and I recommend it highly.
Here is his explanation about why a walk is slower than a gallop (I've
edited for length):
"Why couldn't a horse simply walk faster and faster?...As the walk gets
faster and faster, the animal's center of mass of course moves forward
faster. The centrifugal force acting on it increases as well - just as a
rock tired to the end of a string pulls harder and harder the faster it is
twirled around. Meanwhile, the gravitational force remains the same
regardless of speed. As the speed keeps increasing it will eventually
reach a point where the upward centrifugal force exceeds the downward
gravitational force - the ration of the two (called the Froude number),
will be greater than 1.0 - and the pendulum will fly off the ground...
Because it is impossible to stay on the ground at a Froude number greater
than 1.0, to go faster requires a gait that does not stay on the ground -
thus, the trot or run, each of which contains an airborne jump. Another
way of thinking about this is... that speed equals stride length times
stride frequency.
Jumping is in effect a way to increase speed by stretching the stride
length beyond the limits imposed by the length of one's legs. Although
both stride length and stride frequency do increase as the speed of a
gallop increases, studies suggest that it is the ability to stretch every
last inch out of a stride that gives the fastest racehorses the winning
edge. At the upper end of the speed range, stride length continues to
increase while stride frequency starts to level off."
Budiansky also explains that the reason a horse will switch from a trot to
a gallop is because of energy efficiency and breathing capacity. When a
horse gallops, the oxygen is automatically taken into its lungs with each
opening of the stride. When the legs are pulled back inwards, the lung is
compressed, pushing the oxygen out. This way, maximum efficiency is
obtained with minimal effort for the speed required.
Budiansky explains all the gaits in details. Here's what he says about
paces & racks compared to walks:
"The walk, slow gait, and rack of these 'gaited horses' are really just
variations of the same basic gait (being the walk); they differ only in the
percentage of time that each foot remains on the ground during each
stride."
Fascinating stuff.
Laura & Squiggles ("gee ma, I'm very scientific!")
Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote in article
<62dk0s$nqf$1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>...
>
> (snip of extremely interesting discussion specifics)
>
> >I also think I read somewhere
> > in the biomechanics world that you went faster when you were in contact
with
> > the ground than if you had long moments of suspension -- sort of like
downhill
> > skiers who lose time when they're airborne. Not sure about this.
>
> And jumpers can lose time in the air as well. But I hope some
> engineering type (hint, hint) or physicist will comment, because
> obviously suspension must assist speed in humans otherwise walking would
> be faster than running. And while one can of course have a fast walk
> quicker than a slow run, fast walks lose to fast runs every time. I
> suspect it relates to the earlier suggestion about harnessing of energy,
> but I'm way out of my depth here.
>
Diana Merville
Dear Mike,
I myself don't have any experience with Percherons, however I ride
in the 3-day eventing realm here in California, and a higher level
rider, Bunnie Sexton used to ride a Percheron/TB cross mare. She was
about 16.3 hands, black, and beefy, and gorgeous, but as Patrick(?)
noted in his response to you, that this mare was hard to wake-up, but
once Bunnie got her going on cross-country, then she became a freight
train. She was a very bold and solid jumper, and Bunnie is a very
experienced and tactful rider, but I did notice that Bunnie rode her in
a strong bit. I believe Bunnie sold the mare (she has many horses in
her barn to train and resell), but I can confirm the fact that that
horse was an accomplished event horse (and very striking looking), quite
suitable for hunt-field riding and eventing. What would be your choice
of equestrian sport to use this horse in?
- Diana Merville, with a Paint, not a Percheron
Ignatzmom
>Lots of interesting studies have been done on this. I only remember a
>fraction
> of it.
>Ann
But, infortunately, the only ones I have seen all seem to be done on galloping
race horses (money there?)<g> not on rackers or others of their type. I have
hopes for the study mentioned as going on at Cal Poly--wish someone would tell
us more on it. Are there any "closet biomechanics junkies" out there?
Eiyan
>And while one can of course have a fast walk
>> quicker than a slow run, fast walks lose to fast runs every time.
Studies done on racehorses showed speed was more a product of stride repitition
than stride length. IOW, the faster the rate of repitition, the faster the
horse. However, if two horses have equal repitition rates, the one with the
longer stride will be faster.
Slow motion footage of Secretariat showed that he laid his feet down on the
ground like the spokes of a wheel with a period of suspension between. His
speed was due to a great length of stride coupled with efficiency and economy
of motion.
If the suspension phase of the stride is used to send the horse's mass in a
horizontal plane, the motion is efficient in terms of ground coverage. When
the motion takes on more vertical projection, it becomes less efficient.
Eiyan
>But, infortunately, the only ones I have seen all seem to be done on
>galloping
> race horses (money there?)
And not even on racehorses anymore. Back in the 80's the racing industry was
booming - lots of money and studies done. Interest in racing is diminishing so
much, there isn't the financial support for research.
Ann