Quote:
OK, that is a SIGNIFICANT red flag to me, because it indicates that either the owner of the horse does not know what they are talking about (and so, what ELSE do they not know about?) or they are trying to sell you a bit of a bridge.
Horses do not get hollows on either side of their withers, and actively-deficient long muscles of the back, just from not being worked for a while, not even for a coupla years, nor just from being underfed (except in starvation cases, which this one ain't). What DOES cause that the horse has never been worked correctly in its whole life, and/or the horse is sore/lame.
In my experience, even if the cause is relatively benign, it takes a really good EXPERIENCED rider/trainer (and a lot of time) to correct that type muscling. It is NOT something that's a "getting back into riding" project; and it very definitely DOES affect the horse's ability to behave properly under saddle and carry weight comfortably. Not to mention being real hard to find a properly-fitting saddle, especially if one wants to ride western. (No, you
can't just stack pads under the saddle til it clears the withers).
One poster said something about the appy mares legs.....what does do other people think about her legs by the looks of them in the pic.
THey are lightly built and the fetlocks in particular look a bit rounded and worn, not to the point where I'd say not to look at the horse but to the point where you would want a very experienced person or a vet to look at them for you to see if there is anything more obvious wrong. Also horses with that conformation are IME more apt than some others to have feet/heel problems, again arguing for at least SOME sort of soundness exam by someone who knows what they're doing.
(e.t.a. -- I do not know why people are concerned about the chestnut's length of back, other than having read certain books that *say* you should. I have worked with, and around, an awful lot of horses over the years, and seen pretty close to no correlation between length of back and weight-carrying ability/soundness. I don't see anything about the chestnut that'd make me not want to at least take a look at him, he seems a reasonable prospect physically (and WAY easier to fit a saddle to than ALL of the preceding horses, appy included)
Good luck, have fun,
Pat