Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay
That right there tells me your knowledge of the subject. Conformation is form to function. Without proper conformation, you don't get the desirable function or it makes the horse more susceptible to injury. Just because a horse has weak parts in their conformation doesn't mean that they aren't specifically bred to have those weak points because some of those weak points enhances their ability to perform in certain disciplines. Take sickle-hocks in reining horses for example.
Also, please point out how I have contradicted myself just as how did I misuse the word irony? Don't just point out a mistake, tell why it is a mistake. Answer this: What is another name for sway back in horses? How about this; which croup as far as overall conformation goes is better, Barbaro's or Bernardini's? Which one's hip is better? Now, which one is more desirable for racing and why? You can even redeem yourself to me if you can answer these questions in a coherent manner. I even gave you a clue.
|
yeah no sh*t sherlock--my point was that there are many thoroughbreds out there who would not measure up to your lofty conformation standards and yet they still manage to run and win and get winners themselves.
I have no idea what you are talking about as I never said you misused the word irony...and I graduated from college some time ago, I have nothing to prove to you so you can take your little quiz and shove it where the sun don't shine.