For some time, I've been curious about how people "see" horse movement. I have really made it a practice to "improve my eye," both because I want to get better at it and because my own horse has a slight gait irregularity and I've been trying to get him to move more freely for several years. One of my frustrations is determining if he's getting better or not, so I'll know when I'm on the right track with treatment and conditioning. Of course, when you are familiar with something, it's easy to see a problem that someone else would think is normal. So I've asked others to watch him go.

And that's where the frustration comes in. Most of the time other people don't see a problem, yet I know when Calvin's not comfortable. He's not lame, not bobbing his head, but just not moving freely.

In looking for lameness, people normally look for symmetry — do the left and right seem about the same? In my horse's case, they aren't quite the same, but aren't far off. But that's because he's a little stiff on both sides. So  most people can't see it. When I point out what to look for, they still scratch their heads, feeling like it's too subtle to be a problem.

So when I heard Dr. Raphael Labens talk about some studies of how people see lameness, my ears perked up.

He explained that seeing lameness in horses is a skill. Of course, we all knew that at some level, but he cited some research that backed up how subjective it is. Eight equine veterinarians, four small animal veterinarians and 24 students watched the same computer-generated movement of two boxes on a screen - nothing horsey about the test. They rated the movements as symmetrical or not, and how alike they were. The results varied about 25%, but there was no advantage based on experience.

But when the computer-simulated movement was based on the movement of real lame and sound horses, the vets did much better than the students. Though the study was more involved than that, the bottom line is that the ability to recognize asymmetry and lameness improves with practice.

He talked about another study in which 16 independent observers graded the severity of lameness in 20 videotaped horses. It turns out that they only agreed with each other 60% of the time. And yet another study showed that there was variability even with the same expert examining and re-examining the same horse. There are lots of subtleties that go into forming an opinion.

Seeing lameness is a skill (not an exact science), and that skill improves with practice. But don't expect even experienced observers (your vet or trainer) to see things exactly as you do or to describe the movement in the same way.

You might say, "Now aren't we making a big deal about something that seems obvious?" No. I think it has lots of practical implications. This becomes really important when you are trying to determine how significant a lameness is or if a horse is improving, especially when you get into situations in which a horse is only slightly lame.

Imagine a few scenarios. Your horse seems off. You watch him trot. You ask your trainer or friend to watch him trot. Together you come up with some assessment, and based on your opinions, you wait and see if he warms out of it, you ice his legs and wrap him, you turn him out and hope for the best, or you call the vet.

Let's say you're not at the barn, but your trainer or friend calls you to say that they think your horse is off. Understanding the above information helps you not to get frustrated when the story told by the trainer and friend aren't exactly the same. You know to ask a few more questions in order to fill in the picture.

Or the same "Is he lame?" situation occurs and the farrier happens to be at the barn. He watches the horse, looking at foot flight, while the trainer may have been watching more for head movement. One watches the horse on a lunge line. The other trotting toward and away. Different subjective criteria.

While someone might think of that as discouraging, I don't think of it that way. It tells me that just like a mom knows when her child is getting sick, because I'm practiced at looking at my horse, I'm more likely to notice changes in my horse's attitude or way of going than someone else — even if that someone else is a good horseman. However, someone more practiced than I am at looking at movement in lots of horses might detect gait irregularities in my horse that I'd overlook as familiar.

I'm also less likely to panic if someone tells me my horse is off, since I don't know what "off" means in their mind. And I'm going to listen a little more closely when people tell me about how their horse moves or problems he's having, realizing that they'll see something different than I will, and they probably have limited experience describing how horses move.

Meanwhile, I'm going to keep trying to "improve my eye," since professionals of all types agree that a limp caught early has a better outlook for a quick recovery than if you don't notice it until the horse is really lame.