Bloodstock News

We had horses with Mark awhile back. In the early days he bought horses with poor conformation because they were cheap, no other reason. He did well with them but knew they had their limits. Spirit Of LOve was a good case in point, he won well for Mark but kept kicking himself so was sold on. And sadly had a fatal fall when over obstacles.

I've had enough 'crooked' horses to know that they suffer problems, it's rubbish to say they do not.
 
Of course horses with straight legs will still get problems, and there have to be horses with crooked legs who don't get them but I've yet to come across one! So far as I'm concerned, the largest part of the battle is buying a horse who can stand training, so I'd like to start out on the right foot by buying one that is straight in the first place, in the hope that I've got more chance. You're pretty much put on the back foot already if you buy one with crooked legs, as you'll straightaway have doubts in your mind and be hoping it stays sound. That's even before you start thinking about how you're going to protect its straight legs from being harmed by the other ones!! I looked after a horse with a foreleg put on at 2 o'clock; I spent ages every day putting boots and bandages on in unorthodox ways to try to protect him since his bent leg struck into his good leg every time he trotted or cantered!
 
Isinglass said:
We had horses with Mark awhile back. In the early days he bought horses with poor conformation because they were cheap, no other reason. He did well with them but knew they had their limits. Spirit Of LOve was a good case in point, he won well for Mark but kept kicking himself so was sold on. And sadly had a fatal fall when over obstacles.

I've had enough 'crooked' horses to know that they suffer problems, it's rubbish to say they do not.
Click to expand...


Yes I nearly choked on my cornflakes but I think what he meant to say was that horses with apparently good conformation get injured as much as those who don't. Probably just an impression he had that would not stand up to scrutiny. Personally I would buy a badly conformed yearling if the siblings had raced successfully with the same flaws. This has worked out for me.
 
Bruce is one of the best orthopedic surgeons in the country (he can pay me next time I see him!) Ive known him for a fair few years now and to be honest Id be suprised if thats what he said.(or meant it to sound like!!) Yes to the straight legs being just as able to get problems as bendy ones, but as SL has said, you want the best possible chance that your horse WONT have trouble - and part of that is starting off with the best put together horse you can !!

I didnt watch the morning line though - I was busy moving my horse to a new field in the pouring rain - why DOES it always rain harder when you are doing the bits in the open??!!!
 
I think it depends entirely on what the affliction is and how hard the horse gets trained. Horses that "toe out" tend to be sounder than those that "toe in." I would look at a horse and sum up all its faults as to whether they would suit my style of training. If a horse has poor knees then you want to do more of its work uphill thereby taking the strain off those knees. I would also run it on rising straight tracks as much as possible.
 
That's a very interesting response, j/j. I wonder how many trainers abandon that sort of sense, though, and resolutely try to place the straight-shouldered, straight-pasterned animal over unsuitable going (i.e., heavy or soft) when it's pretty naturally going to be a very stiff-actioned creature, probably a daisycutter, too? I know of at least three I can think of, right away, including one trying to put such an unfortunate beast into chases! (Natch, it failed to even keep up, let alone place.)

You could say, horses for courses, but conformation for courses, going, and the type of endeavour, too. (Although it's not quite as snappy!)

I've no idea if the vet's right, since I don't know what stats support his statement - they're quite possibly anecdotal, based on just his experience, but I'd venture that poorly-conformed horses are by no means as flexible/versatile as those without build problems, as you aren't able to pretty much chuck 'em onto any course and assume that it, in itself, won't create running problems for them.

If it comforts you, Troodles, it's honking down here in not-so bright Brighton, and I have two friends visiting from Derbyshire and Scotland who today were setting out to trundle round the city for fun. At least we're off to Hove Dogs tonight, and will be under cover in the restaurant.
 
The question related to surgery carried out on young horses before they went to the sales and whether good conformation and a perfectly straight leg served as a reliable guard against injury. Part of the vet's answer mentioned that whereas previously surgery was carried out to correct a 'bent leg', 'we now know' that a bent leg can help protect against injury. His remark did appear to relate to particular circumstances and he may have gone on to specify what he meant by a 'bent leg', but he was given less time to talk than he deserved. His very interesting (to me) answer on colic was abruptly cut off by Lesley Graham protesting about putting people off over their cornflakes.
 
Oh, ffs - the stupid woman. I used to address issues of my horse's manure output over lunch, although occasional 'too much information' moments concerning its compactness or otherwise did turn my father as green as the spinach!
 
I wouldn't expect a lot more from her to be quite frank.

Maybe the conversation was getting too technical for her?!
 
I really don't think MJ would ever say that, I know for a fact he has a team of vets who, every sales season trawl through thousands of yearlings legs xrays. I also don't think a vet would come out with such a sweeping statement that he would ignore EVERYTHING below the knee. It was about the same time as Attraction, I think I remember
it being something to do with being "over at the knee" is not such a big problem, it was definatly something to do with knees
 
Sheikh said:
I know , I was just soliciting more info.:o She bred a Grp 3 winner by High top before she went to habitat. Was High top considered a good stallion ?
Click to expand...


Hi, sorry, BT router went tits up on Thursday, hence why the blessed peace...

HIGH TOP was a very decent stallion and perceived wisdom is that he definitely came into his own even more as a broodmare sire.

I don't think Mr Leigh was 'wrong' - CLOUDED LAMP was a very sound handicapper who was probably a lot better than she got credit for and so it made sense to breed her daughter to considerably better stallions. He could afford to do so, after all!
 
Shadow Leader said:
I wouldn't expect a lot more from her to be quite frank.

Maybe the conversation was getting too technical for her?!
Click to expand...


Someone may have squealed down her ear-piece. It was a very flustered intervention, dinner-party hostess style, one I thought rude to the guest.

I also got the impression he was rather offended/annoyed by it as I also would be if I were in the middle of giving a lucid and informative explanation of colic in response to a viewer's question, and the presenter dived in to imply that I was turning people's stomachs!
 
Phhwoarrrr! A right little madam, bain't she? Gorgeous - must be stonking over 2f! She's going into teddy-bear mode for winter, I see!
 
Sea the Stars will stand at Gilltown Stud - the Tsai family will retain ownership. Not surprising when you look at the John Oxx connection. Will be interesting to see how many Darley and Coolmore mares visit. Looking forward to the next Zakhava.
 
I wonder how much a colt or filly by an Arc winner (out of an Arc Winner) out of an Arc winner would go for at public auction...
 
Back
Top