|
|
 Elite Veteran
Posts: 725
  
| Find a nice halter broke 2yo and send them to a colt starter of choice....
OR
Find a broke 3yo that's had 60 days of riding.
Which is smarter economically, and which would you prefer? |
|
| |
|
 A Somebody to Everybody
Posts: 41354
 
Location: Under The Big Sky Of Texas | IowaCanChaser - 2016-05-18 6:23 PM Find a nice halter broke 2yo and send them to a colt starter of choice.... OR Find a broke 3yo that's had 60 days of riding. Which is smarter economically, and which would you prefer? I would rather have a broke 3 year old that I could continue its training, if its got a decent foundation/start.
Edited by Southtxponygirl 2016-05-18 6:38 PM
|
|
| |
|
 I Prefer to Live in Fantasy Land
Posts: 64864
Location: In the Hills of Texas | I would rather have the 3 year old so you could continue riding him lightly and hauling to season rather then having to wait another year. It cost us over $200.00 a month to feed a horse where we are. |
|
| |
|
 Expert
Posts: 1395
Location: Missouri | I'd rather have the 3 yr old, given that it was started correct, of course. Breaking one out myself totally isn't my thing though... |
|
| |
|
 Coyote Country Queen
Posts: 5666
| It would depend on who started the 3 year old. I like that you have an idea of how they're going to ride, and you should be able to get on and go. But I like mine to ride a certain way, and I'd rather start one from scratch than have to fix issues. In 60 days you can see a huge variation in the amount of training a horse has based on the experience of the rider.
You're going to have more time and money to get the 2 year old to the same place as the 3 year old. But if you have someone to start the horse that you know you trust and like the way their horses ride, then this might be the way to go.
The other thing to consider is your personal situation and goals. If you're wanting to futurity as a 4 year old for example, the 3 year old with 60 days is behind schedule. But if you're wanting to have something to haul sooner, that would likely happen sooner with the 3 year old. If things like that don't matter, then I'd just shop until you find exactly what you want. |
|
| |
|
Elite Veteran
Posts: 788
| Jenbabe - 2016-05-19 6:49 AM
It would depend on who started the 3 year old. I like that you have an idea of how they're going to ride, and you should be able to get on and go. But I like mine to ride a certain way, and I'd rather start one from scratch than have to fix issues. In 60 days you can see a huge variation in the amount of training a horse has based on the experience of the rider.
You're going to have more time and money to get the 2 year old to the same place as the 3 year old. But if you have someone to start the horse that you know you trust and like the way their horses ride, then this might be the way to go.
The other thing to consider is your personal situation and goals. If you're wanting to futurity as a 4 year old for example, the 3 year old with 60 days is behind schedule. But if you're wanting to have something to haul sooner, that would likely happen sooner with the 3 year old. If things like that don't matter, then I'd just shop until you find exactly what you want.
This!
And the price of the horse of course. If the 2 year old is going to cost the same as the 3 year old, I would go with the 3 year old. And if you arent wanting to futurity, then you might can find a really good deal on a 3 year old that was simply started late or is just behind schedule for Futurities. |
|
| |
|
 A very grounded girl
Posts: 5052
Location: Moving soon..... | Personally I do not care. My husband breaks everything so I get them when he says they are ready. God matched us together for a reason. I am truly blessed. |
|
| |
Folks on-line