Pendragon wrote:

@shiggins: I can stand critique, this is no problem for me. It is just that if you critique you should mention the details and why you see something negative and something positive. As to a lot of exterior critiques I found here (and where I normally do not interfere) I see that they are often done in the wrong way. You should look at the total horse first and get the tendency of impression, then you go in detail and see if it serves the whole or still serves the whole or really could lead to problems. Here I often find picking on "negative" things immediately as soon as they are not "standard".
(I hope it is understandable what I want to say with this - English is not my mother tongue).
When it comes to different breeds I would not say that some breeds have higher standards than others - they have different standards. As for Knabstruppers you will find the sports type (and there you will find a lot of warmblood mainly) and the classical or even baroque type that is pure bred.
As to Hussar he is a classical pure bred. He is not out of a show jumping breeding program, he is out of a breeding program in dedication to preserve this rare breed.
  
I agree. I don't know that many people here are actually trained to evaluate horses, many are very willing to offer opinions on what they can see but they don't always have a background to apply what they are seeing to the real world. That's not a criticism, it's just saying that there is more to a horse than the sum of his faults. It is nice that people are willing to offer critiques at all, no matter how educated or not they are.