are horses "better" than they use to be?

[~*sugarlump*~]

these days we have amazing equipment, it has to be said,
wonderful medical equipment, state of the art tack, things that make life so much easier for our horses...etc etc

my point is, that with all this new "stuff", do our horses actually perform better than they did, say 50-100 years ago?

are some competition horses at a better advantage than those whose owners arent as well off?
or does raw talent count for alot more than "whos got the best gadgets"

would be interested in opinions :)

SL x

[Joyscarer]

As I'm not interested in competing all I will say is that I personally think that the horses nowadays must be happier and that's all that i'm interested in :)

[Yann]

I think I read somewhere that racehorses reached a peak about 150 years ago and haven't actually got any quicker since, would be interesting to know if that's actually the case.

As far as horses in general go I think there's much more knowledge available about anatomy and physiology and possibly the athletes are better conditioned and less prone to injury than they once were, I don't know. It might also be that horses that wouldn't have cut the mustard 50 years ago are more capable of competing now.

are some competition horses at a better advantage than those whose owners arent as well off?
or does raw talent count for alot more than "whos got the best gadgets"

I think that depends a lot on the horse and rider combination. It also assumes that people who are better off use more gadgets and that the gadgets give them an advantage, which is a bit of a bold statement. If anything the 'less well off' have more access to expert help in all sorts of fields than they once would have, which ought to even things up a bit.

Agree that horses ought to generally be happier now, at least there is some awareness of the importance of their mental as well as physical needs. This wouldn't have been such a priority when they were an essential means of transport.

[Gruntfuttock]

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "perform better". The early Grand Nationals reputedly took up to 20 minutes to run, whereas the fastest one ever was just under 9 minutes, in 1990. The fastest Derby was run in 1995 or 96. Top three-day event courses are faster and more technical than they ever were in the past.

However, horses are much more cossetted and cared for than they ever were in the past, so it stands to reason that they live longer. I've known people fret that a 2 hour hack might be too much for their horse to cope with...100 years ago, the doctor's horse would take him out on his rounds all day, and be expected to do the same again tomorrow !

Edited to add; the doctor's horse would probably have gone to the Great Meadow In The Sky (by way of the hunt kennels) in his mid-teens or maybe even earlier, but plenty of people on this board have happy 20-something horses and ponies still going strong.

[Drifted]

In the sixties I worked in hunt kennels and all the horses were automatically retired at 12 years, they went on to be used for cubbing, hound exercise or parading hounds at shows, they had about 4 years as hunt horses, worked very very hard for 6 months and then had the summer off. It was a hard life for them, and us, I would never ride a horse as hard as they were ridden (my father who was a huntsman had 2 horses drop dead with him) that wasn't unusual in those days. My horse wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes, I am now anti hunting as was father after he retired, for the reasons above - nothing to do with the fox............

Maybe someone on here can tell me that it is all done differently now. I really hope so.

[Wally]

I think horses had more work to do 100 years ago and this made them better mannered.

Having real work every day and handled by horsemen of great expience meant that there were not the problems one sees today.

[Yann]

Wally, have you read Black Beauty? ;) :D

[Wally]

Yes, I did read it and thought it was rubbish! really I did, I must be the only person who hates National velvet and black beauty

[Yann]

LOL! Fair enough :D I take your point though :)

[Esther.D]

Black Beauty has to be read with a pinch of salt Anna Sewell (sp?) openly wrote it as propaganda in order to improve horses working conditions and it was a very worthwhile effort and did make a difference. But it cannot be taken as absolute truth regarding every working horse in that era, read Black Beauty and then read some of the horsemanship manuals and writings of horsemen (and women) of the same era and the reality probably lies somewhere in the middle. Like everything it wasn't all good but it wasn't all bad either. One of the problems was that everyone had a horse for work as well as pleasure and like car drivers today that meant you a huge range of abilities and temperaments, perhaps seen less in todays pleasure riders.

Horses do live longer today, they do have better medical care and sometimes a better understanding of their training and needs (although I am not totally convinced on that one by any means) so yes in that way I would say they have a better life....so do humans for that matter!

[dansmum]

In the sixties I worked in hunt kennels and all the horses were automatically retired at 12 years, they went on to be used for cubbing, hound exercise or parading hounds at shows, they had about 4 years as hunt horses, worked very very hard for 6 months and then had the summer off. It was a hard life for them, and us, I would never ride a horse as hard as they were ridden (my father who was a huntsman had 2 horses drop dead with him) that wasn't unusual in those days. My horse wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes, I am now anti hunting as was father after he retired, for the reasons above - nothing to do with the fox............

Maybe someone on here can tell me that it is all done differently now. I really hope so.

That was a really interesting read. As the owner of a now 15 year old ex masters horse with quite a few 'issues', I would be interested to hear how it is done nowadsys too:)

[Pink's lady]

Having real work every day and handled by horsemen of great expience meant that there were not the problems one sees today.

That seems to be really true. I would imagine 50 years ago there was none of this 'middle ages nervous novice lady buy a horse after a years worth of lesson.' And then things going horribly wrong with behaviour.:rolleyes:

[ClaireBear_nz]

I would say at the top level, they may've because breeding has improved, you can choose a stallion from the other side of the world to breed to your mare which gives more variation and more lines so different combinations and therefore more chance of getting that one incredible horse. The knowledge about genetics, genetic diseases and just normal health is a lot greater these days than it was 50 or 100 years ago, so the ability to breed successfully has also improved. People aren't simply narrowed to local stallions as others are more accessible.

[Silvia]

I think horses had more work to do 100 years ago and this made them better mannered.

Having real work every day and handled by horsemen of great expience meant that there were not the problems one sees today.

Hmmm - I also think 100 years ago people would not have bothered with difficult horses. My grandfather used to have a working horse and if it turned out unsuitable for the job he needed it for, health wise or temperament wise, it went to the meatman without a second thought.

In reply to OP's question - I think there are more "good" horses around these days - as in having good breeding and more potential for their respective discipline. But this also means that more average riders buy these horses and find out they can only control them with said gadgets.