Trying to get a handle on confirmation
- Thread starter crewboss
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
![url]](https://imagearchive.com/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2F%5Burl%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ranchers.net%2Fphotopost%2Fdata%2F500%2Fthumbs%2FP6170125.JPG%5Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ranchers.net%2Fphotopost%2Fdata%2F+...+170125.JPG%5B%2Furl%5D&hash=3bfa444d2064bc9d0b51417afbc880e1)
I think he looks pretty good. Nice level top line, long enough, good muscle in the hindquarters. I think his feet are pretty good but he does seem to be toed out in the front and rear. May just be the way he is posed. Can't say much about his scrotum.
OK I'll bite. I am no shorthorn expert, but I'll evaluate the bull for you from a standard beef conformation standpoint. The bull is quite obvious fed and fitted so I'll judge him with that in mind.
Starting from the head, he has a good head and well extended neck with adequate masculinity, I personally prefer a stronger, shorter thicker neck with more crest developement. His neck shoulder attachment is good and his shoulders blend in very smoothly.
He has an adequate forearm and the length of his cannon bone indicates that he is a medium to medium early maturing animal. His front hooves toe out slightly, but that is so slightly that I won't consider it a fault. When moving I'll definately pay close attention to see whether there isn't any screw motion when placing his front feet. Front pastern angles is good.
He has a slight break in his topline just behind the withers and overall I would have liked to see more spring of rib and chest depth with more gut capacity. In the profile shot he has a very good rump with muscle extending down to the hocks. His hooks to pins angle is ideal (for real world conditions, not neccesarily the club calf world) His flank is good and reasonably level, his hind legs has got a very good angle (again maybe more angle than the club calf showjocks would prefer). Rear pasterns also very sound. His sheath isn't quite the ideal, but still good, his scrotum looks OK from what I can see.
Looking from behind he has a very good wide base, good width of rump with prefectly aligned hocks. The flaw I see here is that in a beef animal the widest area should be the stifle when seen from behind. This bull is widest over the hips and tapers down to the ground. More muscle developement in the stifle and outer thigh would solve this problem. In his condition I would have expected a little more in the second thigh.
Overall a good bull, his biggest fault is the lack of capacity. Not a bull for harsher conditions with lower quality forage.
Starting from the head, he has a good head and well extended neck with adequate masculinity, I personally prefer a stronger, shorter thicker neck with more crest developement. His neck shoulder attachment is good and his shoulders blend in very smoothly.
He has an adequate forearm and the length of his cannon bone indicates that he is a medium to medium early maturing animal. His front hooves toe out slightly, but that is so slightly that I won't consider it a fault. When moving I'll definately pay close attention to see whether there isn't any screw motion when placing his front feet. Front pastern angles is good.
He has a slight break in his topline just behind the withers and overall I would have liked to see more spring of rib and chest depth with more gut capacity. In the profile shot he has a very good rump with muscle extending down to the hocks. His hooks to pins angle is ideal (for real world conditions, not neccesarily the club calf world) His flank is good and reasonably level, his hind legs has got a very good angle (again maybe more angle than the club calf showjocks would prefer). Rear pasterns also very sound. His sheath isn't quite the ideal, but still good, his scrotum looks OK from what I can see.
Looking from behind he has a very good wide base, good width of rump with prefectly aligned hocks. The flaw I see here is that in a beef animal the widest area should be the stifle when seen from behind. This bull is widest over the hips and tapers down to the ground. More muscle developement in the stifle and outer thigh would solve this problem. In his condition I would have expected a little more in the second thigh.
Overall a good bull, his biggest fault is the lack of capacity. Not a bull for harsher conditions with lower quality forage.
crewboss":3kc3pgfh said:
It is an indication of higher levels of testosterone and endocrine balance.
The higher the level of testosterone the more fertile the bull is likely to be and the more likely he is to sire fertile feminine daughters and maculine sons.
Northern Rancher
Well-known member
I like to judge bulls off a horseback-make them get out and travel a bit-I have a feeling this bull will be used more in a paddock than a pasture.
Keren
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2006
- Messages
- 3,415
- Reaction score
- 4
crewboss,
not a bad bull at all, I quite like him.
Knersie said it all, but I'll add that I really like his length and the amount of bone.
I'll reiterate the lack of depth and spring of rib comment.
How old is he? I think he will mature out quite nicely.
not a bad bull at all, I quite like him.
Knersie said it all, but I'll add that I really like his length and the amount of bone.
I'll reiterate the lack of depth and spring of rib comment.
How old is he? I think he will mature out quite nicely.
DOC HARRIS
Well-known member
Knersie-
Your assessment of this bull was well done. The only question I have regarding your comment:
[Quote by Knersie] "Looking from behind he has a very good wide base, good width of rump with prefectly aligned hocks. The flaw I see here is that in a beef animal the widest area should be the stifle when seen from behind. This bull is widest over the hips and tapers down to the ground. More muscle developement in the stifle and outer thigh would solve this problem. In his condition I would have expected a little more in the second thigh."--
is: although his hocks are even perpendicularly - to me his is slightly splayed out both front and rear, and he is slightly cow-hocked. Maybe I am not observing him correctly, but being even slightly cow-hocked puts his weight when mounting a cow at breeding time on the outside, or lateral aspect of his hocks, causing possible stifle displacement problems in a couple or three years. I agree with those who contend that a bull should have a slight "sickle-hock" display to compensate for possible "post-leggedness" - a negative characteristic when anticipating longevity in a breeding bull - and this bull seems okay in that regard, but the appearance - to me - of being cow-hocked is a caution. The "club-calf" comment is very good - real world cattle and club-calf/show cattle are two whole different animals! Perhaps some breeders can live in two different world's at the same time, but they are few and far between!
Oh, one more thing: I am unfamiliar with the term "...a little more development in the 'second thigh'. Can you "elucidate"?
DOC HARRIS
Your assessment of this bull was well done. The only question I have regarding your comment:
[Quote by Knersie] "Looking from behind he has a very good wide base, good width of rump with prefectly aligned hocks. The flaw I see here is that in a beef animal the widest area should be the stifle when seen from behind. This bull is widest over the hips and tapers down to the ground. More muscle developement in the stifle and outer thigh would solve this problem. In his condition I would have expected a little more in the second thigh."--
is: although his hocks are even perpendicularly - to me his is slightly splayed out both front and rear, and he is slightly cow-hocked. Maybe I am not observing him correctly, but being even slightly cow-hocked puts his weight when mounting a cow at breeding time on the outside, or lateral aspect of his hocks, causing possible stifle displacement problems in a couple or three years. I agree with those who contend that a bull should have a slight "sickle-hock" display to compensate for possible "post-leggedness" - a negative characteristic when anticipating longevity in a breeding bull - and this bull seems okay in that regard, but the appearance - to me - of being cow-hocked is a caution. The "club-calf" comment is very good - real world cattle and club-calf/show cattle are two whole different animals! Perhaps some breeders can live in two different world's at the same time, but they are few and far between!
Oh, one more thing: I am unfamiliar with the term "...a little more development in the 'second thigh'. Can you "elucidate"?
DOC HARRIS
Doc, again in real world conditions his hocks are pretty good. To really accurately judge how well aligned his hocks is you need to see him walking away from you. A well trained animal and a show stick can do wonders.
In every trait, or call it fault if you like there is some tolerance for what is considered normal, this animal is still well within the normal range. Many of the old showring standards, including the shape of the front legs when seen from the front and the hocks when seen from behind, is a far cry from what Mother nature intended. Go any straighter than this and you're selecting for a showring whim and not a functional trait.
Have a look at buffalo of all species, all of them are sickle hocked, all of them are cowhocked and all of them have a sloping rump, and that is no secret that Mother Nature selected them herself. If a slight sicklehock, slight cowhock or a slightly sloping rump were so bad for longevity, there wouldn't have been any buffalo around today. We need to observe nature and get closer to that to get back to low maintenance cattle that the market is gradually demanding more and more through increased input cost.
On the second thigh comment, I'll have to make a drawing for you first, give me a little time.
Similar threads
