What do we want – Optimum or Extreme?

.

.

There are many characteristics, which – in their entirety – characterise the Arabian horse. On a scale, each of these characteristics has an optimum. The question is, where this optimum lies on the scale – always at the top end? Take for example the size, this ranges in Arabian horses from 1,40 to 1,65 cm – I stipulate, the optimum is around the middle, which makes it 1,50 to 1,55 cm. Now, there are the riders, who will contradict – the (riding) market asks for big horses, of about 1,57 to 1,62 cm. Looking at this from the optimum, it is at the “top”, in the range of “extremes”.

The situation is similar with what we commonly describe as “type”. Take the profile of a horse on a scale, which ranges from a straight profile to a profile with an extreme dish and a “teacup muzzle”. The optimum for me, is again somewhere in the middle, maybe even below that. And now we have a problem: Our rating (or judging) systems at shows, no matter if you use 10 or 20 points, no matter if you use five or more criteria, always gives the highest score to the extreme, which is at the top of the scale – not to the optimum. Those who want to win – and who doesn’t if he enters a competition – has to strive for the extreme, not the optimum. And that is a fault in the system.

The neck is another example: Here, the scale ranges (simplified) from a short, thick, straight neck to a giraffe-like long, snake-like bend neck. For me, again, the optimum (e.g. for riding) lies in the middle. At shows, the judges will always score the longer neck higher, although there is not real meaning in such a long neck in the use of the horse, just because it is difficult, to “punish” the extreme with a reduction of points. But that’s exactly what we need – we need to prefer the optimum to the extreme.

At long last, it was the characteristics of the all-round horse, which were responsible, that the Arabian was crossbred with almost all other horse breeds without any problem. The ideal Arabian, for me, is an all-rounder, not a horse of extremes. Under the rider, he can do all, but – with the exception of endurance riding – not extremely good (i.e. he is not as good as the specialists of that discipline). He is not extremely fast (i.e. not as fast as the English Thoroughbred), does not have an extremely long neck (if you only look at the old photographs, you’ll see), and – yes, – he does not have an extreme dish. All this are “achievements” of modern times, which actually alienate the individual from the optimum and therefore from the ideal. So far, we have not achieved to create the right “competition” for an all-rounder, where all important criteria of the Arabian horse are covered. Instead, we specialize the breed in certain areas until it becomes a grotesque. It is time, to create other scoring or rating systems, which do not favour the extreme, but the optimum, the ideal.
Gudrun Waiditschka