What Molds Show Well: Ponies

I mentioned when discussing the typical classlist, ponies weren't always their own division. Once upon a time, you had one class to show all of your ponies. If you were really lucky, they may even split it into two whole classes.

In recent years, this trend has been bucked with the introduction of multiple new pony molds. However, there is little consistency at this point on how the pony division is split into classes. Some classes split by region, like so:

Welsh Ponies
Other British Ponies**
European Ponies*
American Ponies
Other Pure/Part Ponies

*Because there has been confusion on this in the past, the Newfoundland Pony is not a European Pony. Newfoundland is a province in Canada, and not some mysterious country in North Europe. A Newfoundland Pony should not be confused with a New Forest Pony. For those of you who think I'm kidding about this, this was an issue at NAN and Breyerfest last summer. I had a horse nearly disqualified from his class.

**FYI, I'm also the reason they've announced at the last two Breyerfests that they acknowledge that Ireland is not part of the UK, but put your Connemara's in UK Pony, anyway. Laura: the hobby's Geography Nazi.

Other shows split by general pony type. As a judge, this is one of the most confusing possibilities:

Stock Ponies
Sport Ponies
Light Ponies
Draft Ponies
Other Pure/Part Ponies

I get Stock Ponies (POAs, Paint Ponies, Quarter Ponies) and Sport Ponies (German Riding Ponies, Connemaras.) I'm iffy on Light Ponies, although I'm sure it includes American Shetlands, Hackney Ponies, and American Walking Ponies. But I'm always lost what is meant by Draft Ponies. It's not popular concept (to my knowledge) in the real horse world. I guess you could put Welsh and other British Native Ponies here. But where do Shetlands--the most popular breed--go?

I've asked this question a lot and never gotten a standard answer. If you are confronted with this type of classlist, ask your judge where they prefer to see them shown.

For this division, I prefer Flash over everything else Breyer produces. For more on potential breed assignments for Flash, see this post.

Bouncer has been very popular in the OF show ring since his release. Personally, I have a problem with the stance of this mold. When you look at him from the front, his legs are set excessively wide. If you plan to show this mold as a Welsh, be mindful of the different sections. The original release was advertised as a C ("Pony of Cob Type".) In my opinion, his body isn't heavy enough to depict a section C. I would rather see them as a section B, the lighter riding-type pony.

I also adore the Peter Stone pony. I've seen this mold be particularly successful when shown as a riding-type pony or pony/TB cross. Many pony breeds are often crossed with thoroughbreds to produce good mounts for young riders. This kind of cross will often resonate with a judge as being very realistic cross.

What Molds Show Well: Stock

See what I did there? I'm going in order according to my typical classlist.

From this point on, I will cover mini molds separately, in their own post. It's just easier on my brain.

This division is a little different than the other because with one or two exceptions, all stock horses adhere to the same standard. A Paint or Appaloosa is just a Quarter Horse with a flashier wardrobe.

If you missed it, I recommend reading my previous post on types within the Quarter Horse breed first. The same type of splits exist in the Paint and Appaloosa breeds, such as hunter, western pleasure, gaming, roping, reining, and racing types.

The only minor difference in between the foundation types. For Paints, they basically don't exist. No one breeds "Foundation Paints" because Paints were originally registered as Quarter Horses. They weren't split into their own registry for a few decades after the founding of the AQHA and there aren't (to my knowledge) any specialty breeders for them.

Foundation Appaloosas are based on remnants of the spotted horse of the Nez Perce. I'm going to dodge completely around the long and violent history involved here and say that the early Appaloosa breeders didn't have much original stock to work with. Arabian, Thoroughbred, and Quarter were all added in to beef up the gene pool over the years to create the modern Appaloosa. Foundation breeders are seeking to preserve the oldest bloodlines and minimize in the influence of DNA introduced by these other breeds.

Usually, today's Foundation Appaloosa has a large barrel, long shoulder, thick neck, and large head. Their hips are less heavily muscled then a modern stock horse, more like the hip of a gaited horse (such as a Tennessee Walking Horse) than a stock horse:

Model-wise, this body most resembles the Breyer Indian Pony. In general, I don't recommend this mold for halter classes, but with the right assignment I've seen them be pretty successful.

Foundation Quarter Horses are based on a different body type, but the principle is the same: minimize the influence of outside bloodlines. Foundation breeders oppose the influx of Thoroughbred DNA into the AQHA gene pool after 1940--without a hint of irony. Somewhere along the way, the foundation breeders seem to have lost track of the fact that the majority of their foundation stallions were Thoroughbreds. Remember Peter McCue? Registered Thoroughbred. And Wimpy? The known parts of his portions of his pedigree--and even most of the unknowns--are all Thoroughbred.

I feel better having gotten that out of my system.

Getting back to body type, a foundation quarter horses is just a Quarter Horse. They tend be on the rougher, bulkier side, but not outside the spectrum already represented in the AQHA.

Unlike the Appaloosa, I don't see an advantage to showing any of the current Breyer or Stone molds as a foundation. Except for the old Quarter Horse Gelding, none of the molds are unrefined enough to justify this assignment.

In this division, my favorite molds are the Lady Phase, Ideal Stock Horse, and Smarty Jones.

The Lady Phase has some minor quirks in the mold. One of her eyes is bigger than the other and her hooves aren't quite even. However, in the grand scheme of Breyer, these faults are extremely minor. I prefer the new long tailed version to the original, as I find the slightly higher tail set more flattering. A high tail set on a stock horse gives the hindquarters a feeling of "squareness" (as on the real life example above.) A very low tail set can give the false of impression of a goose rump.

A real goose-rump

A slight goose rump can be advantageous for some disciplines, but is a handicap in others.

The Ideal Stock Horse and the RRQH it's based on is an extremely popular mold. The musculature is very realistic, his proportions are great and his flaws are few. I have a few nitpicky problems with this mold, but they are mostly production related. He's a little downhill, but some of the different mane styles of this mold cover this better than others. When buying an ISH as a show horse, always set him on a table and look at him from the front. Some ISHs are "base narrow" meaning their hooves are too close together. This isn't the original mold, but the result of minor warping in the plastic. His off side nostril isn't always prepped correctly and should always be carved out on a custom.

I like the Smarty...probably a little too much. I have a large conga line of them in my own collection and show them frequently. Because of this extreme position, every muscle in the sculpture is tense. This gives him the impression of being bulkier than he really is. If he were standing still I think he would look more like this:

Smarty Jones (the real deal)

However, I like seeing him in stock classes because he makes a great racing bred or high percentage TB stock horse. My only fussy issues are his small ears and slight discrepancies in the lengths of his legs bones (they're off--just a little.)

These three molds are interchangeable between all stock classes except mustang. While I know people show them this way, an ISH or Lady Phase is not a mustang. These molds are so easily recognizable as QHs/Paints/Appaloosas that I don't buy them as mustangs or another breed type. Mustangs have some characteristics in common with the stock breeds and their type varies widely. However, I've never seen a mustang with that much muscle. If you encounter a mustang that looks like the bay in this post, please forward me pics. I wanna see.

Silver is the most popular mold in the mustang class. He reminds me of a ferret.

If I left out your favorite mold, please let me know in the comments and I will gladly tell you why. ;)

What Molds Show Well: Foals

I'm starting a new series based on the question I get asked the most often: Which molds show well and what should I buy?

During this series I will present the molds I've seen be successful in the show ring. However, I can't repeat this mantra often enough: Collect what you love, show what you collect. If you don't like the Proud Arabian Mare, no number of ribbons will ever make you love that mold anymore. Having said that, it is helpful (especially to those of you with large and varied collections) to know which of your models to bring with and which to leave home.

These mold suggestions will apply both to original finish models and simple customs. Moderate and drastic customs are often altered to the degree that their flaws have often been eliminated.

I've split this series into breed groups with the intention to go class by class, following the typical classlist I outlined previously. I'm breaking it down this way because successful molds are predicated on the class they show in. There are some molds that are fine by themselves, but they may not win often at a show because there are better molds that they must compete against. On the flip side, there are molds that only show well because the competition in their class is so scarce.

Stock Foals

In a stock foal class, the Peter Stone Weanling reigns supreme. She was cast from the original resin Parrs Dream Doll by Carol Williams, also a very popular mold. There is very little to nitpick on this mold and she is a wonderful accomplishment by the sculptor.

If Breyers and Stones are shown together in OF or custom, the weanling is your best bet. However, they are split out or you are showing at a Breyer only show, you may consider the classic Mustang Foal, who is making a resurgence in popularity. The G2 foals (including the Running, Scrambling, and Scratching Foals) dominate this class in the mini division and can also hold their own when shown against traditional.

Paint weanling


Stock foals are show their distinctive large butts at an early age

Light/Gaited Foals

As with the stock division, I highly recommend Stone's option, the Arabian Yearling, over anything Breyer produces. For Breyer only, you can consider the Saddlebred Weanling, who has both his fans and detractors. The classic Arabian Foal, like his mustang counterpart, has come back in fashion with the increased popularity of Maureen Love's work. The Trotting Foal is also popular in both mini and combined divisions.

Arabian foals are light boned with high action

The twin foals, Amber and Ashley, show best in this division when shown as Morgans or a similar medium body breed. I've seen them have some success as stock foals, but--in my mind--they don't show any of the type I want to see in a stock foal at this age. Honestly, I don't really care for either of them as show models (I own a few and don't show them), but I that's not a hobby wide opinion.

Morgan foal


Morgan foals tend to look a bit generic

Sport Foals

At the moment, this class is a crap shoot. I've seeing showers win with any of the breed I listed above for Light and Stock with odd breed assignments. Some are creative and make sense, but others are hard to believe.

I've seen a lot PS Weanlings shown as sport horses (often sport crosses, warmbloods, and even Thoroughbreds). I hate this assignment, but it's common and may win this class because of limited competition.

What is ideal in a Sport foal is often a fault in a Stock horse (and vice versa)

My favorites for this class are, again, the Running, Scrambling, and Scratching Foals. I think of them as the Rorschach test of model horses: whatever breed you see them as probably says more about you than the foals. They weren't sculpted to depict particular breeds (to my knowledge), plus their drastic movements and scale obscure any hints of type.

Outside of the minis, the new classic Warmblood foal is my favorite. His type his very obvious to me, although his conformation isn't completely perfect. But I'm mostly biding my time until Breyer releases Galen in plastic.

A very typical warmblood foal

Sport foals are easiest to identify by their action

Draft Foals

The Clydesdale foal.

...you wanted more? No one remembers the last time this class was won by anything else. It's not as much as testament to the mold's quality (his legs are way too short) but to the lack of competition.

Pony Foals

The most popular molds in this division are any of the above shown as one of the "near horse" breeds. By "near horse", I mean breeds that are short versions of standard horses such as the Quarter Pony, the POA, the Paint Pony. You can also through breeds like the Connemara, which has a high percentage of thoroughbred mixed in, to this category.

As in the Stock Foals class, the Weanling and Rorschach foals are very popular.

Model Halter vs. Real Halter: Pt. 3

Color is a constant issue in model horse showing. Unlike horse breeders, Stone, Breyer, and independent artists aren’t restricted in any way as to color. We don’t have to worry about those silly genetics. We can just pick something pretty and run with it! As a result, it falls to the shower to research a breed that matches the body type of the model and comes in the same color.

Breed books are an okay start, but they have an unfortunate tendency to be unspecific unclear, and inaccurate. Luckily, hobbyist Leslie Kathman has created a handy-dandy guide just for this purpose. Beyond that, there’s good ol’ Google Image Search, which is where you’ll eventually end up anyway trying to find photos for documentation.

As I mentioned on Monday, colors are often eliminated from a breed’s gene pool over time. Sometimes the color gradually withers away as a side effect of selecting for unrelated characteristics. Other times, the color is bred out intentionally because the color is considered undesirable. Registries will often take this one step further by not allowing horses that are the “wrong” color to be registered or approved. This is the case with the Friesian registry, which does not approve non-black animals for breeding.

The AQHA used to have a similar rule denying papers to foals with “excessive white markings.” Colonels Smokin Gun (Gunner) was one such foal:

If he’d been born on the wrong farm a few decades earlier, Gunner would have been just another overly white foal to quietly “disappear.” Instead, he was registered with the APHA, despite coming from two QH parents.

That was until a few year ago, when the AQHA passed the following:

A horse having white markings with underlying light skin beyond any one of the following described lines shall be eligible for registration by AQHA only if it is parentage verified through DNA typing the offspring, its sire and its dam. Breeders should be aware that the American Quarter Horse, while long recognized, identified and promoted as a solid-colored horse, can and does occasionally produce offspring with overo paint characteristics. Such markings are uncharacteristic of the breed and are considered to be undesirable traits.

In other words, they are happy to take your money in exchange for papers as long as you keep your pintos out of their halter classes.

And in the model world, chaos ensued.

On the one hand, we’ve always allowed unusual colors like chestnut Friesians, as long as they had appropriate documentation. Now, we have a rule that says they’re allowed but at the same time says they’re undesirable. What’s a model horse judge to do?

There isn’t a tidy answer for this problem and different judges have interpreted this rule in their own way. At this time, pinto QHs appear on a regular basis in at live shows. Disqualification is always a risk, but never a certainty.

Just speaking for myself, I disqualify them. I know its sounds hypocritical given my post from Monday and my allowance of other “undesirable” colors such as cremello QHs and chestnuts Friesians. However, we already have a separate class for pinto stock horses: the Paint class. In my opinion, a pinto shown in the Quarter Horse class is in the wrong class.

The primary reason you see pintos shown in the QH class has nothing to do with registry rules: the shower is trying to move their horse into a sometimes less competitive class. With few exceptions, the pintos seen in QH classes are minimally marked. The Paint class, for better or worse, frequently rewards loudly marked horses, putting these models at a disadvantage (which is also why you probably won’t see someone trying to show a solid-colored horse as a breeding stock paint.) This is especially true for custom-finish divisions, where workmanship and finish play a larger part in breed classes. Just as the louder patterns dominate in the paint class, these minimal marked models get a leg up against solid-colored models.

Is it fair either way? Not really. I’ve repainted minimally marked customs and resins to make them more competitive. Same body, same base color, but the pattern made all the difference. One of my current best show horses couldn’t win a NAN card until I extended his pattern. My advice is to keep this bias in mind when you decide whom to bring to a show.

This is my final installment of this series for the near future. Tune in tomorrow when I will delve deeper into breed assignments.

Model Halter vs. Real Halter: Pt. 2

I’m not going to talk about live Quarter Horses anymore (is that a sigh of relief I hear?) but I am going to start with this year’s NAN Champ OF Quarter Horse.

I’ve judged this specific horse at previous shows, I’ve lost to him at other shows, and I’d steal him off the table if I had a chance (I’m kidding--sort of.)

Even though Breyer markets this model as a Thoroughbred, his owner shows her copy as a racing-bred quarter horse. This is a great choice because the mold is not as bulky as a stock horse mold like Smart Chic Olena, but not as lean and leggy as a Lonesome Glory or classic-scale Man o’ War, which many model horse judges prefer in a Thoroughbred class.

He’s not shown as a halter-type QH (as I discussed yesterday), and he’s not in a halter pose. A horse isn't supposed to gallop in a real halter class. But in the model world, there is no rule against it and I have never seen a judge knock a horse for an “inappropriate” pose.

Even "bad horse" poses are allowed:

And "natural" poses:

In this case, artistry wins out over adherence to our real world counterpart. Speaking as an artist: thank god. Sculpting and customizing would be dreadfully boring if our only options for LSQ (live show quality) models were performance and halter appropriate poses. As is, I find myself constantly biting against the bridle of live showing’s restrictions and limitations.** If I could only sculpt/sell models in polite/boring poses, I’d go batty.

**My constant attempts to bend or circumnavigate live showing rules are probably the reason I’m so familiar with them.

Model Halter vs. Real Halter: Pt. 1

This was supposed to be Friday's post, but real life decided to intervene before I could complete it. These days, my schedule is not completely my own.

When talking to non-hobbyists, I find it’s usually easiest to describe live showing as a shrunken down version of the real thing. However, this comparison only works to a point. Not all breed associations offer “halter” classes at their shows and those that do each play by their unique set of rules.

And then there’s fashion. A written breed standard is rarely amended, let alone substantially altered, but the current aesthetic in all halter shown breeds appears to be in constant flux. In some breeds, halter bloodlines have become so specialized they’ve virtually become a breed within a breed. For illustrative purposes, I’m going to use the Quarter Horse as the most dramatic example of this split, but the same issues apply to a number of breeds including other stock breeds, Arabians, and Morgans. Cutting, reining, roping, pleasure, hunter, racing, and halter have all split out to varying degrees within the AQHA, but no type is excluded from a model horse halter class.

When I judge a model QH class, I know I have options on how I can approach it. The first option is to judge it as a real world halter class and choose horses that best represent this physical type:

"First under all five judges."

This is CK Kid, and as much as it pains me to say so, he was an AQHA World Champion in halter.

If he were a model horse, I’d say his legs are too small and his back is too short in proportion to his body. Top to bottom, he is completely upright with no body angles to absorb any shock from movement. This much muscle (1500 pounds on a 16H horse) on top of double-ott feet is a recipe for disaster. I’d tell you this horse wouldn’t be able to run correctly with his conformation and is susceptible to a premature death. Considering his sire, dam sire, and grand-sire died at 9, 16, and 12 respectively, it’s a safe bet this 9-year-old stud doesn’t have many years left.

Referring back the judging elements I previously outlined, this horse is typey but not well conformed. His proportions border on unrealistic, which is a concept that makes my head hurt.

As a judge, my second (and preferred) option is a holistic approach. I know QHs include a wide range of body types, each bred to serve a specific function. At live shows, we show all types, ideally with no bias. I try to judge each against their own type, i.e. reiners should look like this, pleasure horses should look like that, and so on. Type-y-ness may be a tiebreaker only in that I prefer a model that is easily recognizable as it's assigned breed, but it’s not my first concern.

In contrast to the above, let’s look at a National Champion model halter horse:

This is a model I would love to have for my own show string. Her shading and collectibility both add to the “wow” factor, but for the purposes of this post, I’m only going to cover her conformation.

Overall, her build is lighter than the behemoth above, but there is no mistaking her for anything other than a stock horse. Her legs and hooves are substantially larger and better built to withstand the physical stresses of athletics. If she were a live horse, I’d guess she's bred for roping or gaming but with the potential for more. She’s balanced and well muscled, with straight legs and good body angles.**

In addition to various modern types, as a model horse judge I frequently encounter horses shown as historical breeds and types. In these cases, make or break often depends on quality documentation (future post.) This kind of breed assignment is usually chosen because colors are often eliminated from a breed and physical types evolve. However, the basics of functional conformation stay the same, as the below horse attests:

Peter McCue, AQHA Hall of Fame inductee.

Not perfect, but the basic angles are correct and a glance at his record testifies that his conformation was more than functional. He was a successful racehorse, but an even more successful stud and founding stallion of the AQHA. He’s built like a horse that could have walked out of a QH breeder’s barn today, but he was born in 1895.

A modern Quarter Horse with similar conformation, born over a century later.

When the AQHA was formed 45 years later, his genes were what they sought to perpetuate. This is his descendant, Wimpy P-1, a grand champion stallion and the first horse registered with the AQHA:

Of the five photos I’ve included in the entry, which of these horse is not like the others? Hint: It’s not the model. (It’s CK Kid.)

Tune in for next week's post, when I continue to rattle on about Quarter Horses (just the model kind.)

**Speaking of body angles, is conformation a topic anyone would like to hear about from me? Please let me know in the comments.

Common Terms and Abbreviations

At live shows and on this blog, you will encounter dozens hobby and show specific terms. The following list isn't exhaustive, but it covers the basics:

Halter: This is one of the two primary divisions. All Halter classes have the same thing in common: you stand your horse on the table and walk away. Traditionally, documentation and halters are allowed (a legacy of real world halter classes) but not required. All other tack and props are not allowed. In a halter class, it's just the horse that is judged.

Performance: This is the other primary division, and usually the hardest to describe to the uninitiated. Showers combine models, tack, dolls, props, and even dioramas to capture a moment in time. A strong emphasis is placed on accuracy and respecting to rules of the real world disciplines that are represented.

Collectibility: A type of halter class, models are compared and judged based on their age, condition, rarity, and desirability.

Breed: Another type of halter class, models are judges on realism and conformation.

Workmanship: A type of halter class held just for custom-finished models. The original body is generally ignored and the model is judged primarily on finish work.

Mini: Generally, "Pebble" scale (1/20-ish) and smaller. Also included Breyer's Little Bit/Paddock Pals, Stablemates, Mini Whinnies, and Stone's Chips scale.

Original Finish: A model that has not been altered from it's original, factory painted finish.

Artist Resin: Resin-cast sculptures that are finished by individual painters. Usually, they are extremely realistic.

Customs: Any original finish model that has been altered or enhanced. Resculpting and repainting are common.

Custom Glazed: Similar to an artist resin in that they are often released unpainted and later finished by an artist, except on a clay-based body.

The hobby uses abbreviations everywhere, but especially at shows. I can't remember the last time I even said "Original Finish" out loud instead of "OF" (oh-eff.) These are the abbreviations you will see in most show packets:

Appy: Appaloosa
AR: Artist Resin
ASB: American Saddlebred
CM: Custom
ISH: Ideal Stock Horse (Peter Stone's standing stock horse mold.)
MFT: Missouri Fox Trotter
NAMHSA: North American Model Horse Shows Association
NAN: North American Nationals
NSH: National Show Horse
OF: Original Finish
OOAK: One of a kind
PRE: Pura Raza Espanola aka Andalusian
QH: Quarter Horse
RMH: Rocky Mountain Horse
RR: Regular Run
SR: Special Run
STB: Standardbred
TB: Thoroughbred
TWH: Tennessee Walking Horse
WB: Warmblood

Feel free to add more common terms and abbreviations in the comments.