Am not chestnut!

Nessa · Postby **Nessa** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:00 pm

He's a good looking colt but anyone else see a bay colt and not chestnut?

http://www.equinenow.com/horse-ad-201068

Bondama · Postby **Bondama** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:03 pm

He appears to me to be going grey.

RiddleMeThis · Postby **RiddleMeThis** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:11 pm

He shouldn't be gray as dam is listed as chestnut and sires a dark bay.

Im on my phone so i won't say with 100% certainty but he looks like he Could be bay.

Jorge · Postby **Jorge** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:22 pm

Seems to me like he is sporting sufficient "chestnut" hairs on the mane and tail plus no black points in the legs. So, a chestnut right?

accphotography · Postby **accphotography** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:57 pm

That's a bay if I've ever seen one.

Derby Lyn · Postby **Derby Lyn** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:03 pm

Donna those were my first thoughts exactly! That he is going grey. His tail is very light colored like a chestnut.

accphotography · Postby **accphotography** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:08 pm

Just for comparison, this is a bay:

That foal's legs are definitely shedding dark.

LB · Postby LB » Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:46 pm

I agree with those who say that the foal in the ad is bay.

xfactor fan · Postby **xfactor fan** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:57 pm

Maybe wild bay.

Also Seattle Fitz has no chestnut offspring. Not a huge numbers of foals, but still. Mama is a chestnut.

accphotography · Postby **accphotography** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:01 pm

Yes Seattle Fitz could certainly be homozygous black.

I don't see how this foal could possibly be considered wild bay when I see black all the way up the knees and hocks.

xfactor fan · Postby **xfactor fan** » Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:59 pm

The legs are kind of a smutty brown. And not a lot of black in the mane and tail. However it is a foal, and subject to lots of change. So it could be any sort of bay when the adult coat comes in.

RiddleMeThis · Postby **RiddleMeThis** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 12:06 am

xfactor fan wrote:The legs are kind of a smutty brown.

If the horse was wild bay the legs should be RED not brown of any sort.

And not a lot of black in the mane and tail.

Well of course not. It hasn't even shed its foal coat yet.

Tons of "flaxen" in this horses mane and tail and hes 100% definitely bay

accphotography · Postby **accphotography** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 12:17 am

Just wanted to say, for anyone that might not have understood what I mean... I could see how this foal could be confused for a wild bay (although she doesn't end up being one) since the only visible points on her are at her ankles. I just can't see that of the OP foal.

The tail was explained in other posts.

Regardless of what type of bay, I'm certain he's not chestnut.

Jorge · Postby **Jorge** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 5:05 pm

RiddleMeThis wrote:
xfactor fan wrote:The legs are kind of a smutty brown.
If the horse was wild bay the legs should be RED not brown of any sort.
And not a lot of black in the mane and tail.
Well of course not. It hasn't even shed its foal coat yet.

Tons of "flaxen" in this horses mane and tail and hes 100% definitely bay

Interesting case. And his name is: ______________________

HeadlessHorseman · Postby **HeadlessHorseman** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 5:11 pm

"Sparkles"... :lol:

That one is SHINY!!!

HH