PDA

View Full Version : Professionals & Amateurs on the same horse?



DMK
Aug. 23, 2000, 10:06 AM
As quoted by Duffy... In my "younger" amateur days, I might have agreed with a couple posters here about the amateur being the only one "allowed" to ride/train/show his/her own horse at a given show. However, now being a single mother of two young children, I would have to disagree with that rule. I have had horses that do much better when hacked in the ring, if allowed, on show mornings. When I feel up to it and do not have the children with me, I'm still happy doing it. But, when I have the children with me, who are already exhausted from having a late dinner after schooling the night before, only to have to wait another 6-10 hours later in the day for Mom to actually show, after having gotten to the show pre-dawn, and then to try to have a pleasant evening again, only to do it again the following morning?? I don't think so! LOL

Another reason to not have that rule, is the lack of horses available to the professionals to ride in their divisions. What would happen to those rated open divisions if professionals were not allowed to show horses shown by amateurs at the same shows? I know there are some owners out there who love to just watch their horses show. I love doing it myself! But, there are times in my life when actually showing myself is what I want to do as well. I would like to always have the option to have my cake and eat it too, if at all possible!

This was on the AHSA/USET/et al thread, and I thought it deserved it's own thread (sorry Duffy! dragging you into the limelight!!!)

My thoughts are that I agree with Duffy, for the following reasons...

If I am rider who happens to work for a living, and can't get to my late afternoon Friday classes until a couple hours before they start (just have to get some work done before I leave!) I would not like to lose th efreedom of putting someone on the horse that morning to hack him.

If I have a green horse, I would like the freedom to show the horse in my divisions, as well as have the professional ride him in his division. Personally, I am not happy when those divisions occur on same days, but since I am not in charge of scheduling, I don't wantto be a victim of the schedule, ESPECIALLY if classes get moved around at the last minute.

Those are just some of the reasons why I would not like to see restrictions on pro/am rides.. other thoughts?

[This message has been edited by DMK (edited 08-24-2000).]

DMK
Aug. 23, 2000, 10:06 AM
As quoted by Duffy... In my "younger" amateur days, I might have agreed with a couple posters here about the amateur being the only one "allowed" to ride/train/show his/her own horse at a given show. However, now being a single mother of two young children, I would have to disagree with that rule. I have had horses that do much better when hacked in the ring, if allowed, on show mornings. When I feel up to it and do not have the children with me, I'm still happy doing it. But, when I have the children with me, who are already exhausted from having a late dinner after schooling the night before, only to have to wait another 6-10 hours later in the day for Mom to actually show, after having gotten to the show pre-dawn, and then to try to have a pleasant evening again, only to do it again the following morning?? I don't think so! LOL

Another reason to not have that rule, is the lack of horses available to the professionals to ride in their divisions. What would happen to those rated open divisions if professionals were not allowed to show horses shown by amateurs at the same shows? I know there are some owners out there who love to just watch their horses show. I love doing it myself! But, there are times in my life when actually showing myself is what I want to do as well. I would like to always have the option to have my cake and eat it too, if at all possible!

This was on the AHSA/USET/et al thread, and I thought it deserved it's own thread (sorry Duffy! dragging you into the limelight!!!)

My thoughts are that I agree with Duffy, for the following reasons...

If I am rider who happens to work for a living, and can't get to my late afternoon Friday classes until a couple hours before they start (just have to get some work done before I leave!) I would not like to lose th efreedom of putting someone on the horse that morning to hack him.

If I have a green horse, I would like the freedom to show the horse in my divisions, as well as have the professional ride him in his division. Personally, I am not happy when those divisions occur on same days, but since I am not in charge of scheduling, I don't wantto be a victim of the schedule, ESPECIALLY if classes get moved around at the last minute.

Those are just some of the reasons why I would not like to see restrictions on pro/am rides.. other thoughts?

[This message has been edited by DMK (edited 08-24-2000).]

Ash
Aug. 23, 2000, 10:09 AM
I posted this under the original thread as well. I work full time and most of the time my horse leaves Monday or Tuesday for a show. Is he supposed to stand in his stall all week until I arrive Friday evening? How about the days when I show in the afternoon and can't make it out to flat in the ring in the morning? Am I going to be penalized beacuse I have to work? What about the income loss to the professionals? How in the world would you monitor something like this?

Bascule
Aug. 23, 2000, 10:41 AM
Sorry guys. I am an Ad.Am. who rides, trains, ships and shows my own horse. Nobody rides her but me--EVER. We do well in spite of me. I tend to think if a trainer is showing, tuning and training the horse and the adult shows it in the adult division, then it sort of negates the purpose of having the ammys in the 1st place(sorry for the run-on). Those of us who do our own stuff are essentially still riding against the pros. Just my opinion, don't flame me for it.

Van Teal
Aug. 23, 2000, 10:44 AM
I for sure want the option of putting a Pro on my horse, I'm a ammy with a full time job also, and being one, mistakes happen, I want to know that my horse could be given confidence in the ring by a pro if needed.

Van Teal
Aug. 23, 2000, 10:48 AM
Bascule, I do agree with you at the Adult level. There is one barn in our area that has the Pro ride the division before, every horse that will then show in the 3' adults, that's excessive. However at the 3'6" height I truly want the option of having the pro sit on to "fix" a problem IF needed.

Bascule
Aug. 23, 2000, 10:54 AM
Van Teal: Understood. I work full-time, too. I am never home before midnight during the week. Nobody gives my horse more confidence than I do and I don't want them to.

Bascule
Aug. 23, 2000, 10:57 AM
Just my opinion, I'm not suggesting a rule change or anything. Just something for people to think about.

DMK
Aug. 23, 2000, 10:57 AM
Bascule - hey, isn't that what this is all about - our own opinions? Nobody should be flamed for it!!! So, while I am disagreeing with you for the following reasons, please don't think I don't respect your opinion!

My perspective is that I too was an A/A rider who has her own barn, ships, does about 90% of the training, will go to some shows on my own if necessary BUT I appreciate the fact that when I get to ride with my trainer (located in different state), my horse gets additional tuning that I am just not good enough to give him. He also has increased in value by virtue of the wins those professionals have earned. I can assure you, plenty of people are still beating me in MY classes, despite this fact, especially those that have those top dollar horses that are so finished that a professional doesn't need to get on them!

So I think there are lot of inequities in the current system, I just don't think there is an easy fix to them... just my thought!

Portia
Aug. 23, 2000, 11:02 AM
I'm in the same boat with many of the rest of you, but here's another twist. With my 5 year old mare, who for now only my trainer shows, sometimes I need to work her while my trainer is busy with other horses and students. Or if I'm not around, my trainer's apprentice sits on her. She does the jumpers, so at an A show she only does 3 or 4 classes total and there are plenty of days she's not showing but still needs to get out and about.

With my gelding, we usually only do local 2 day shows, and I'm generally the only one who rides him, but then he's a laid-back 13 year old and he simply doesn't need any extra work. Still, at the few A shows we do go to, I'd like to keep the option of having my trainer ride him on those days I'm working and can't be there at out of town shows.

For the future, I'd also like to keep the option of me showing my mare in amateur jumper classes and my trainer showing her in the pro classes. That's not because I can't handle her or need my trainer to keep her going or tuned up, but because I'm not about to ride any horse in the Open Jumpers. However, if the horse is talented enough to do opens, I'd like to see her do them with my trainer.

Anne FS
Aug. 23, 2000, 11:14 AM
Why not keep everything as it is but ADD a division in which only the person riding in the class will ride the horse during the course of the show?

That way all the folks with pros can still ride like they do now, but openings will be made for people who train/show on their own.

Let's face it, aren't many people turned off from competing in A/A because you just about have to have a pro doing the bulk of the work? Again, nothing wrong with that, it can make for a better horse, but why not include people who now are turned off by A/A. I bet everyone knows people who would show in this new division, and it could be a nice reward/recognition for those who choose to go it alone, whether for personal or financial reasons. It could also help to get shows away from the perception(fact?) that unless you have big bucks to spend, don't bother with AHSA, cuz there's nothing for you here.

What do you think?

Ash
Aug. 23, 2000, 11:22 AM
Hmmm...interesting idea Anne! What height level were you thinking about? Hunters and jumpers?

Aug. 23, 2000, 11:25 AM
I hate to sound like a broken record, but once again (as I posted on LA's thread), I think that rules and their application should go to support the goals/missions of an overseeing body. If the sub-goal of the AA division is to broaden the constituency of adult riders, then allowing professionals to ride as well makes sense. But let me present a different scenario as it pertains to kids (my immediate interest, for the moment). If the goal of the Pony Hunter division is to cultivate great riders for the future, then what purpose do professional riders serve? As an example, there are kids we see time and again who NEVER even warm-up their own ponies in the warm-up ring (and most own multiple ponies). [As a side note, one mom "bragged" to me that after 3 years of riding, her 9 year old could not tack up her own pony and would never care to!] A small professional warms up the kid's five ponies and the kid is perched on the saddle then torpedoed into the ring. The pony is on autopilot. If, on the odd chance a pony misbehaves, on pops the professional, everyone waits while it's schooled, the kid is popped back on and wins the next round. This IS NOT allowed at Pony Finals and, I believe, should not be allowed at Horse Shows if we want to build up riding skills (not merely point acquisition skills) in our children. The allowance of the professional appears to be counter-productive in the long-run. That's one reason why I think that the best rule-making will follow from a cogent, inclusive, strategic goal setting process.

Bascule
Aug. 23, 2000, 11:33 AM
Anne: I very much like your idea.

Also, something else I feel strongly about (for myself at least). If I can't fix any problems myself or with me on my horse and my trainer on the ground, then I shouldn't be showing at the A level. That is when it is time for me to school and do homework---- at home.

[This message has been edited by Bascule (edited 08-23-2000).]

AMom
Aug. 23, 2000, 11:39 AM
In principle I agree with Bascule as I would prefer to be the only rider on my (somewhat problematic!) gelding. However, I don't have my own barn or my own truck and trailer, so my horse goes to the shows with everyone else's horses--today--when my show doesn't start until Saturday. Sometimes it just isn't possible for my guy to stay home and for someone to come back and pick him up on Friday for me (especially Indio). Yes, I will go ride him after work although time will be really tight with daylight savings starting to wane, but it sure will be nice that our pro, who is only there today through Friday morning, will have an opportunity to hack him in the daylight so he doesn't have to sit in a port-a-stall all day. I prefer that to longing by a longshot. And to clarify, on the days when I am there and am showing, she quite gratefully does not ride him--she's usually gone home.

Okay, this may sound hypocritical (it's okay for a pro to ride in SOME circumstances, but NOT others, LOL) but what I do find a little objectionable is the scenario I witnessed at a recent show: Junior rider is watching the USET course. Trainer is warming up junior's horse figure-eighting over a single vertical up until there is one horse in front. Trainer then takes horse to junior who gets on and goes right in! If you are ready to do the USET, you should be able to warm up your horse for it as well. Same goes for the A/A riders.

lillian
Aug. 23, 2000, 11:43 AM
I agree with Portia -- having the pro ride my horse at the show early in the week, allows me to work until the amateur classes start, usually on Thursday or Friday. I have one more point to add. While I've ridden my entire life western, I'm a green novice when it comes to this jumping stuff. I make a lot of mistakes and my hunter is smart enough to pick up on it. The trainer riding her in the warm up classes and pre-greens allows him to "fix" the damage I sometimes do. If the rules were to change, and I was the only rider allowed on my mare at a show, I would quit showing.

DMK
Aug. 23, 2000, 11:46 AM
Maybe an option would be to ban anyone BUT the rider from riding the horse in the schooling area for the class, once the class commences (I say that in cast the 1st years run in the ring prior to the class starting). That won't stop people who want to leave the area and school, but most shows don't let hunter riders school in pony/jumper schooling areas, and don't have a general schooling area, so I think it would be an improvement, as well as providing a "position" on the subject of horses that get schooled for the class...

Anne FS
Aug. 23, 2000, 12:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ash:
Hmmm...interesting idea Anne! What height level were you thinking about? Hunters and jumpers?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I was thinking hunters. Jumpers we all just go for it, right? /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Hunters seem to be the problem because of the subjective judging. Believe me, I'm all for professional trainers, but it does seem a shame if those hard-working amateurs who are putting out nice horses all by themselves shouldn't have a place in AHSA. Actually, isn't that what A/A was meant to be? It's ok that it evolved into something else, but why not have classes for the rest? 2'6", sure, but also the big stuff. People would show if they felt they were getting a more level playing field and competing against other amateurs and not against the pro trainers. Heck, I'll even sponsor a class myself and put my money where my mouth is!

I'm just trying to think of ways to include more people in AHSA shows. It seems to me that the vast majority of horse folks don't see any reason for being involved with AHSA.

Skipper
Aug. 23, 2000, 12:34 PM
I agree 95 % with Bascule. It makes me CRAZY that A/A riders trainers ride the horse in the warm-up and just put the rider up for the class. If you can't ride the warm-up you shouldn't be showing at recognized shows. I also hate that the pros ride the greens or working division before the A/O rides the same courses on the same day. I can appreciate that some people don't want to show at all or at 3'6" and just like to see their horse go and that's o.k. but I don't think the pros and the ammies should show at the same show. I'm not saying that if your horse gets shipped 4 days before you arrive that the trainer shouldn't get your horse out and exercise it for you but just don't have the trainer show it. Oh and Ponymom- that would make me nuts as well; those kids aren't learning horsemanship at all.

Janet
Aug. 23, 2000, 12:38 PM
I agree with most of what Bascule says.

I can see some of the other points, too.

Personally, I would never SEND my horse to a show under conditions which required someone else to ride her. I get my "jollies" out of the training process, and primarily see shows as "the proof of the pudding". For both these reasons, I am unlikely to be sending my horse to "away" shows without me.

But I can see that for others the showing itself is the objective, and the training (whoeveer does it) is primarily the means to that end.

I can see a couple of compromises that could satisify both objectives.

First, in CT (and I think in dressage) someone other than the entered rider is allowed to ride the horse "at a free walk on a long rein".

I think that, for the hunter/jumper disciplines, a rule which allowed someone other than the entered rider to ride the horse ON THE FLAT ONLY would work. (You can never write a rule that will distinguish between "hacking" and "schooling on the flat", even though "hacking" is the intent here.) This would take care of the logistics problems of a horse that needs to be exercised when the rider is not on the grounds, while eliminating the trainer "tuning up the horse" just before the rider gets on.

This still leaves the problem of cross entering. If the horse is entered in both the Schooling Hunters and the A/A (or Green Working and A/O) then both the amateur and the trainer are "entered riders".

If (as is often but not always the case) the amateur and "pro" classes are on different days, you could make the rule apply on a day by day basis (e.g., the pro can ride in the "schooling" division on Friday- and school on Friday- but only the amateur could school and ride on Saturday).

ALternatively, the AA division already has extensive restrictions on cross entering. They could be extended to say that the horse may not enter any class with another rider.

Or, where there are lots of AA entries, the division could be split into an "open" AA (with no restrictions on entering classes with another rider), and a "restricted" AA class, where only the entered rider can show the horse in other classes. You would want to set it up so the "restricted" AA division was the more prestigious.

From my personal perspective, I would support a rule that said that, for AA, AO, Jr., Childrens, etc., no cross entries with another rider are allowed. This would also have the desirable impact of reducing the "pounding" on horses showing both Green and AO. YOu would have to choose AO this show, Green the next. But I think that the money and politics are firmly established against this kind of rule change.

The one about "other than the entered rider" riding on the flat only, could, I think get enough support to fly.

Jumphigh83
Aug. 23, 2000, 12:42 PM
Some adults and jumiors are NOT capable of training their own horse and I applaud them for having the common sense to get help. There is NO sin in having someone better than you 'set up' your horse. It makes more sense than screwing up youself OR your horse. Good for those of you that are able to but don't stigmatize all A/A s or A/O s and Jrs because they arent Rodney Jenkins. I think knowing what you DON'T KNOW is more important than knowing what you DO know.

Portia
Aug. 23, 2000, 12:45 PM
Well, I certainly agree with PonyMom, Bascule, AnneFS, CFS and the others about the rider not warming up their own horse for their class. I can see how a pro with lots of horses to ride needs his/her assistant to hack a horse out to begin the warm up process, then just take a couple of jumps before the class, but I can't see any reason why an amateur can't warm-up their own horse.

I don't see how it works anyway - doesn't the amateur need to sit on the horse for ahwile to see how the horse feels today? what mood is he/she in? how is he/she jumping? I guess if you can just get on the horse and go in the ring, the horse really must be push-button. Not a creature with which I'm familiar, I'm happy to say.

And as for the kid PonyMom mentioned who doesn't know how to tack up her own horse/pony, well, I feel very sorry for her. Some of my best moments with my horses are spent during grooming and tacking up, and taking care of them after the ride. How sad not to enjoy those quiet times with your animals.

Anne, I very much like your idea. There would be some problems with enforcement and the riders and trainers would have to go on the honor system in part, but it is an excellent idea.

CTT
Aug. 23, 2000, 12:48 PM
Just my opinion but I like the idea of spliting the classes in the highet levals. Pros in one class and the other hard working amatures in another. Might mean more classes but I feal more people would not be so intimidated if they did not half to go in with a pro. Even in the greens If I was to be in those classes and knew I was against a pro I would be intimidated and want to shy away fromdoing the class. I personaly feal that the classes should be split alowing a more even field. Heck many of us are not as good as some of the pros and to go in a class like that would be a discuragement to many.

Skipper
Aug. 23, 2000, 01:08 PM
Jumphigh, I didn't mean to "stigmatize" A/As,A/Os and Jrs and am not implying that you have be Rodney Jenkins in order to show at recognized shows but I think that you should be able to warm up your own horse, seek help from the trainer on the ground if you are having a problem and then deal with whatever happens when you go in the ring. I don't think that the trainer should set up the horse for you. If you are warming up and things aren't going well and you might be screwing up yourself or the horse THAT badly and the trainer can't help you fix it from the ground, you probably aren't going to be able to fix it at the show anyway.

Magnolia
Aug. 23, 2000, 01:24 PM
I rode with a trainer who rarely showed our horses (unless they were for sale or super green). I usually schooled the course, and did the warm-up class. A lot of times, we would beat trainers in the warm-ups (how fun!).
I hated schooling the course(IMO, that is just suicidal), so when it was more crowded, she'd have one of her better students school the horse for me. I think you should do what your comfortable with at shows- if you don't want to be up at 5am to school, don't!
I think the thing with the kid and the pony is pathetic. What is the point of that? It sounds like mom's sole purpose of having the kid ride is to win ribbins!! not to become a horseman.
I think a good class for juniors & amateurs would be one similar to the IHSA format~ draw a horse, hop on, and jump the course. That would really show who could rise and who couldn't!

Tiramit
Aug. 23, 2000, 01:32 PM
Ok, I've been reading everyone's comments and nodding my head with all the complaints about pros riding for kids and amateurs, but understand, as someone who puts in more than a full week, why an occassional pro ride or school is necessary. I think that the real complaint isn't having someone else ride, but the fact that there are often winning riders who haven't a clue about true horsemanship. PonyMom's story child is a perfect example of what seems to be driving the fun out of showing and making the whole experience more politically and monetarily motivated than ever.

I like Anne's idea of a separate division, but what about adding to the division's themselves? Since the division championships are the key motivators, why not add a true horsemanship class / test to each division? It would be nice if there were some outside courses with option lines, but maybe a tacking-up, a mounted test or even a written test could help. After all, the Adult, Pony or Amateur o/f champion should know how to tack up, ride a test, school (heaven forbid judged / monitored schooling?) and spew horse facts if asked. And if that person wants the championship, they'd sure learn (can't really buy knowledge). Oh, and of course the rider should ride her own horse for the pre-class school. Really, this IS riding after all.

I wouldn't have any problem with an A/O winner who had a pro ride during the week because of work, but these riders shoudl be able to prove that they deserve to win... Not exactly like Pony Club or Eq, but just plain horsemanship. Who knows, it might make showing horses fun again (rather than who has the biggest checkbook). I can just see all the A/O riders wrapping the perfect polo wraps or adjusting bridles right now... Of course, for those who are above testing, they can just buy their own championship cooler.

[This message has been edited by Tiramit (edited 08-23-2000).]

AMom
Aug. 23, 2000, 02:02 PM
I like the horsemanship test ideas! I was in an Ariat workoff recently when, after doing a ridden workoff, we had to approach the judges and answer a question. Granted, the questions weren't exactly rocket science, but I thought it was a very encouraging departure from "trot fence 4, canter 7, 3, and 1, halt, leave the ring at a sitting trot." I think it has been discussed in other threads, but I love to see the adult medals getting more support. Equitation and horsemanship shouldn't stop counting at 18!!

There's a class at an upcoming Pebble Beach show that I was dying to enter (Grandmother's 100th birthday is same day so I can't) where you have to perform a dressage test and an over fences test and they have it for every age group from a pony division through the adults. Too cool! http://www.chronofhorse.com/ubb/eek.gif That's what makes showing fun--not all these cookie cutter HITS shows where the prize lists and schedules are IDENTICAL for weeks on end. You could probably take the Indio prize list and use it to enter at Tahoe or in the East without missing a beat. Not that I have an agenda against the shows themselves, they just aren't interesting.

I do love to show, but it isn't my main objective--riding better is. Getting back to the original topic here, as someone who does have a pro ride if I have to work and can't get to the show until the weekend, I also have to say that I have watched this pro ride my horse and have learned a tremendous amount from what she does. I ride him better now. I've gone on way to long and I am not working which is what I am supposed to be doing so I can pay for this dang show!! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Anne FS
Aug. 23, 2000, 02:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jumphigh83:
Some adults and jumiors are NOT capable of training their own horse and I applaud them for having the common sense to get help. There is NO sin in having someone better than you 'set up' your horse. It makes more sense than screwing up youself OR your horse. Good for those of you that are able to but don't stigmatize all A/A s or A/O s and Jrs because they arent Rodney Jenkins. I think knowing what you DON'T KNOW is more important than knowing what you DO know.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course!

I am not stigmatizing A/As or A/Os. The riders being placed at a disadvantage are the ones who DO train, warm-up and ride their own and do a fine job, but don't have the edge of having their horses seen in classes with Mr. Super Trainer on board, or don't have Super Trainer warm up the horse for them. Let's reward these people; let's reward the horsemen/women out there who do have this ability. It's not taking anything away from you; it's adding something for other people.

Who knows? This could really be a start for putting horsemanship back into horse shows! It could encourage people to learn more about training and riding, because now there would be a division rewarding the ones who do take the time to learn all those details.

I'm not asking for the world here. Horses and riding being as difficult as it is, of course I would recommend professional help in training. All I'm saying is during days of the show, the only rider is the one showing. If I can't do this, fine, then I show in a different division and let the folks who are willing to put in all the effort of riding their own shine out.

Magnolia
Aug. 23, 2000, 02:29 PM
Asking a question is a great idea. At an IHSA show, there was a rideoff for champion. The judge asked the 2 riders to jump 4 jumps from the previous class, to best show off the horse's strengths. Then, when the 2 completed the test, he asked them why they chose what they did. To do this well, you have to be knowledgable about the horse, and well spoken (know terms). You would not do this well if the only time you rode was in your class. This adds a new dimension to testing.

Colin
Aug. 23, 2000, 03:09 PM
I have ALWAYS had a pro sit on my horses at shows. Why? Because they go better for ME after the pro has "tuned" them. End result -- I have an easier horse to ride and usually do better. I don't think there is anything at all wrong with that. In fact, I don't think I've ever met ANYONE who shows on a regular basis who doesn't have a pro "tune" their horses for them. In my opinion, it's the SMART thing to do!

Colin
Aug. 23, 2000, 03:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cfs:
Jumphigh, I didn't mean to "stigmatize" A/As,A/Os and Jrs and am not implying that you have be Rodney Jenkins in order to show at recognized shows but I think that you should be able to warm up your own horse, seek help from the trainer on the ground if you are having a problem and then deal with whatever happens when you go in the ring. I don't think that the trainer should set up the horse for you. If you are warming up and things aren't going well and you might be screwing up yourself or the horse THAT badly and the trainer can't help you fix it from the ground, you probably aren't going to be able to fix it at the show anyway. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Sorry, but I have to TOTALLY disagree with you here. I will "deal with whatever happens" at home, but will do everything possible to prevent having to deal with anything negative when I'm at a show.

And, you can fix a LOT at the show. My Colin has a spook in him, and requires a very strong ride the first time in the ring. After that first ride (if it's accurate and "professional") he is fine. Sure, I could probably do it myself, but I'm not very comfortable with the kind of ride he requires the first time out. So....I have a pro sit on him, prep him for me, and then I'm fine.

A "well done, professional tune" can last a very long time, too!

Benaja
Aug. 23, 2000, 03:17 PM
I have to say I really don't understand some of the comments made on this thread. Which is more "unfair" - the novice rider who shows in the a/a's on a $300,000 packer that never gets a professional ride, or the baby green horse ridden by an experienced a/a rider who might need to be tuned by a professional for a division first? There are already novice adult divisions at most A shows I attend that are used by the people who should really be in them. I have no problem w/pros riding others' horses first, juniors or adults. If the rider can't ride, all the tuning in the world by a pro won't help them find the jumps.

Tiramit
Aug. 23, 2000, 03:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colin:
I have ALWAYS had a pro sit on my horses at shows. Why? Because they go better for ME after the pro has "tuned" them. End result -- I have an easier horse to ride and usually do better. I don't think there is anything at all wrong with that. In fact, I don't think I've ever met ANYONE who shows on a regular basis who doesn't have a pro "tune" their horses for them. In my opinion, it's the SMART thing to do!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey Colin, you'll hate me for this one, but why not try and learn from the pros and become a rider who CAN tune your own horse? It isn't written anywhere that amateur=bad. For me, I want to become the best no matter if I'm making money off of the sport or not. My goal is to be a great and knowledgeable rider, regardless. There have been plenty of amateurs out there who can ride the pants off of some pros! Because you made the blanket statement, I'll let you know that I've met people who DO show successfully on a regular basis who do not have pros ride their horses for them, so it's not required for winning rounds.

Colin
Aug. 23, 2000, 03:36 PM
Maybe having a pro ride is not required for winning on some horses, Tiramit, however, certain animals DO require a professional ride to be brilliant, and I think it's important to be able to realize that. Although I consider myself to be an extremely talented rider, I am not fit enough to school my horse myself and show in 3 classes all in the same day. (I work 50+ hrs/week and don't ride very often) I suppose I am fortunate that I can afford to have a professional school my horses for me....and also fortunate to be enough of a horseperson to realize when my animals require it.

Tiramit
Aug. 23, 2000, 03:59 PM
All right Colin, I agree with you that some horses need it, and that pros are helpful. My comment to you was mainly based on your use of the word, "always" - surely you want to continuely grow as a rider and have a goal to one day be able to show and ride your horse all on your own? Work schedules certainly interfere (at one point I was getting up at 4:00 to ride mine before the day started), and having a team to help you out is great, but wouldn't it be great to just win all on your own?

Maybe I'm just strange in that I really get a kick out of working with and learning from my horses and I enjoy showing simply for the sake of showing. Believe me when I say that I've won quite a bit in the past (yes, they were big wins) and was several trainers' catch rider for a long time, but I found that the actual training and partnership with my horses has been my true love. Not that I'm not the most competitive person you'll ever meet (trust me on that one!), but I'd rather compete against myself and my idea of an ultimate ride than against a ring full of people who had someone else do the hard work. Lucky for me since that seems to be the option! Also why I switched to jumpers...

Bascule
Aug. 23, 2000, 04:03 PM
benaja: I have to disagree with you here. I have seen horses that I know tuned by trainers that I know, then the Adults(who I also know and absolutely cannot ride and do everything short of ride backwards) get on and simply steer to each fence and WIN. It happens, don't kid yourself.

I am still in love with the idea of a higher/separate adult division for the ones who know how, want to, and have the time to do it themselves.

Colin
Aug. 23, 2000, 04:08 PM
Hey Tiramit -- I totally agree with you on the satisfaction gained from working with the horses yourself. You see...I have NO TRAINER at home. Never have. Only meet up with them at the shows, which is the only time my horses get the "professional tune"! LOL! Yes, I essentially do it all on my own at home.....so at the shows, when I get the pro to ride them for me - it's a special treat for everyone! LOL!

Flash44
Aug. 23, 2000, 04:15 PM
There are a lot of good points made on this thread. The amateurs that do the bulk of the work on their homemade horse deserve a lot of credit, but are really up against it when they have to compete against the expensive packer or the professionally prepared horse.

The A/A division is large enough that instead of splitting it by age, why not do an open A/A where any horse can compete and a restricted A/A, where the horse cannot be shown by anyone other than the A/A rider (and maybe a jr in the Childrens?). Maybe add a horsemanship class where the rider is judged on eq for 25%, horse 50% and questions/demonstrations/testing 25%?

It may be a bit harsh to state that the horse cannot be ridden by anyone other than the rider even in schooling, since many people have to send their horses up with the trainer long before they themselves can get there.

Hattie
Aug. 23, 2000, 04:16 PM
Gosh - awhile back I was defending the A/A division at the AHSA rated shows since quite a few people seemed to think that is is "dumbing down" the shows. Can you imagine the uproar with two 3' divisions for the A/A's and childrens's(along with the age splits)!!!!!!

Ash
Aug. 23, 2000, 04:17 PM
Tiramit-
I think I can answer your question to Colin. To become a rider that can tune your own horse to the same level as a professionalÂ… you have to be a professional! I really believe that the major difference between a lot of the amateurs and the pros is time spent in the saddle. If I could ride 6-10 horses everyday and show 4 days a week, I would certainly be better qualified to tune my own horse. But the reality is I ride 3 times a week at best (usually 1 or 2) and show up after the schooling classes are done (they are usually during the week) and really don't have the desire to waste my $$$ tuning my horse in an A/O class. If my trainer can tool him around on Friday in a schooling class, then why not? Is that considered to be unfair or un-sportsmen like behavior? Hardly! There is a big difference between a person who gets on at the gate and one who has a pro tune their horse during the week. Trust me, I wish I was wealthy enough to be at every show all week long to do my own horse, but I am not. I refuse to be ashamed of the fact that I have my trainer ride my horse.

Tiramit
Aug. 23, 2000, 04:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colin:
Hey Tiramit -- I totally agree with you on the satisfaction gained from working with the horses yourself. You see...I have NO TRAINER at home. Never have. Only meet up with them at the shows, which is the only time my horses get the "professional tune"! LOL! Yes, I essentially do it all on my own at home.....so at the shows, when I get the pro to ride them for me - it's a special treat for everyone! LOL!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ahh, now that makes sense!! So in essence, you do it by yourself. We're in the same boat! In that case, congratulations on your prestigious win at Tahoe! As an aside, I don't think you'd have any problems with a test, so you don't qualify as a poser rider /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

DMK
Aug. 23, 2000, 04:39 PM
Ash, I have to agree with you on that one, and well said too. Like Colin, I don't have a trainer in the same state, so I have to carefully try to advance my horse in between horse shows while not doing things that might cause harm (it's a humbling experience to have to admit to yourself that you shouldn't attempt something because you will not do it well enough to teach the horse correctly... especially if you have spent your whole life trying to do this better than you did on the last victim, er, horse). Times with trainers are few and far between, but they MUST be used to advance us as a team.

I too don't particularly like losing to a person who literally mounted the (expensive) horse at the ingate, but if I was truly honest, I personally don't see that as the great majority of riders I ride against (at the A/A or A/O level). From my view, any changes shouldn't punish the many who don't abuse the priviledge, to get at a few exceptions.

Hattie - you have valid points - one more division is a lot, but maybe since it wouldn't really be adding class time (no cross entries here), it wouldn't mean more work/less profit for the horse shows. Also, like Jr/AO at C shows, maybe under certain circumstances (class size) the class could still be combined, but would be pinned separately?

Jumphigh83
Aug. 23, 2000, 04:42 PM
Sorry I still disagree. I have seen too many kids and adults hurt because they irroneously believed that they could "deal with whatever comes up, at home"..home is not the horse show. SMART people seek help when they need it, the others , I think are not only arrogant, but ignorant. It would be really nice if we all had the ability to make up horses, but sadly that is NOT the case. MOST horses ridden by juniors and amateurs would benefit from an educated ride, and this is NOT an afront to anyone..only acknowledging the expertise of those that CAN make up horses for the juniors and amateurs to show. Why do dog onwers send their dogs with pro handlers? Why do race car owners pay a driver..why do race horse owners hire a jockey? If you want something done right, go to an expert in the field and then let them do their job.

Bascule
Aug. 23, 2000, 04:55 PM
I have the luxury of hauling my own horse to the show. She goes when I go. No waiting around the show grounds in a stall which would necessitate a ride by someone other than myself.

I don't ride multiple horses a day. I consider myself fortunate that I simply get her worked 5 or 6 days. I do go to the barn EVERY DAY. No, she is not at my house. I commute 1.5 hours from my office to get to her. My point being that knowing your horse the best doesn't require riding 7 horses a day or having them in your back yard.

My trainer loves her, but he doesn't know her anywhere near as well as I do. I like it that way. If something were to happen and he couldn't meet me at the ring, I could go in and get the job done. It's a very good feeling.

Tiramit
Aug. 23, 2000, 04:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ash:
Tiramit-
I think I can answer your question to Colin. To become a rider that can tune your own horse to the same level as a professionalÂ… you have to be a professional! I really believe that the major difference between a lot of the amateurs and the pros is time spent in the saddle. If I could ride 6-10 horses everyday and show 4 days a week, I would certainly be better qualified to tune my own horse. But the reality is I ride 3 times a week at best (usually 1 or 2) and show up after the schooling classes are done (they are usually during the week) and really don't have the desire to waste my $$$ tuning my horse in an A/O class. If my trainer can tool him around on Friday in a schooling class, then why not? Is that considered to be unfair or un-sportsmen like behavior? Hardly! There is a big difference between a person who gets on at the gate and one who has a pro tune their horse during the week. Trust me, I wish I was wealthy enough to be at every show all week long to do my own horse, but I am not. I refuse to be ashamed of the fact that I have my trainer ride my horse.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Whoa, I NEVER said that it was wrong for pros to ride horses for others, just agreeing with others who commented on those pseudo-riders who take advantage of pros at shows, as in hopping on at the gate /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. No problems with hard working people who are stuck in the office. Honestly though, if one can't warm one's horse up immediately before a class (as in some of the above stories), should one really be showing?

I also work a long week and couldn't make it to the early parts of shows, so having someone hack my horse may be an option (never have, but who know in the future), BUT, I would most certainly ride my horse the day I did show and right before my class. Otherwise, I'd wonder if I was even a part of the showing team that would seem to mainly consist of my trainer and my horse! Where exactly is the rider in this little group? Why not just tie sacks of flour to the horses and see which one makes it around the course? It's a riding class, so ride the horse (not directed at anyone specific, just letting out some general frustrations)!

However much I may be reemed for this comment, I still contend that maintaining amateur status does not preclude one from being a good rider with skills enough to warm-up a horse. My point is that having a pro ride should be a tool for the immediate, not as a standard practice and most definitely NOT as a qualifier for winning a class / division. And yes, it is possible to still be a good rider on three rides a week. Just make sure those rides count /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif! Surely one can learn enough about one's own horse in that time?

OlmosHeaven
Aug. 23, 2000, 05:10 PM
When I first started riding (in my mid-20s), I couldn't afford to let my trainers ride my horse, but I was of the opinion "My hobby, my horse, my riding" (for better or worse).

I'm still of that opinion and I have never had a pro warm up my horse for a class I was to ride in.

BUT, I had an amateur horse in the late '80s that was a difficult horse to ride. If a jump was moved from one side of the ring to another, that would be reason enough to put me on the ground. I didn't always have what it took to hand ride him around a new course -- especially when he would go to a show ahead of me and I had to drive in on a Thursday night after work.

My trainer often showed him in pregreen and, later, first year green classes. But I would do the warm up and riding for the A/A and A/O. We did quite well -- 5th in the state on the basis of only 7 horse shows in A/O and first year (and sometimes I rode him in the first year). But he was never easy and I could win a class on him one day and be eating dirt the next.

Now that I event, the rules are so very different. No one but the exhibitor can ride a horse at an event or horse trials -- unless it's the groom WALKING the horse to or from the competition arena.

Fortunately, my mare never looks at a thing -- pretty much a necessity for eventing anyway.

My jump trainer has been on her once -- early on in her jumping so I could see what she looked like. And my dressage trainer has been on her once -- ditto. And Karen O'Connor got on her in January to help me work out some submission issues during a clinic.

Like Tiramit, I get immense satisfaction out of knowing that, for better or worse, I did the work on the horse that I'm riding. Not even seeing a pro win a big class on your horse can equal that feeling.

DMK
Aug. 23, 2000, 05:23 PM
Bascule, I respect your position and admire your dedication, I truly do, mostly because I think you and I think the same.

I too trailer my horse to shows, and I also go to the barn every day, and I am pretty much the sole rider/trainer for my horse. NOBODY, and I mean, nobody knows my horse better than I. The trainers I have ridden with know this and respect my opinion when I give them advice on how to ride my horse (and are kind enough to not remind me when I am wrong /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif ).

That being said, I have a horse who I truly believe is a nice horse, and it is a goal of mine to bring along a nice first year horse. I am like so many who post here - when that horse does well in a class (regardless of what the judge's might say), I take pride in his accomplishments, because they are, in part, my accomplishments, even though a professional rode him in that class. I know the "pro" didn't make him the horse he is, he just bought out the abilities that I helped create, better than I ever could have. As I said, I don't think less of my talents, I just think I am part of a team.

But what I really wonder is, because I do have a pro ride my horse in another division, or sometimes earlier in the week (NEVER on the same day, unless there is a class overlap) do you think that this gives me an unfair advantage over other A/A or A/O riders? I really am honestly asking this and not trying to be flip, because my perspective has always been that I feel at a disadvantage when I compete because I don't board with a trainer, most improvements are self taught with lessons few and far between, riding my ex-racehorse, who for better or worse, has primarily had DMK teaching him how to jump, and I get to compete against Jane Doe on Seeing Eye, who she just paid $250,000 for, and no, a trainer doesn't get on him, but why would he need to? So I apologize if this sounds like I am being critical, but the response to this thread was a little surprising to me, and I want to understand better the thought process behind everyone's opinion.

Tiramit
Aug. 23, 2000, 05:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jumphigh83:
SMART people seek help when they need it, the others , I think are not only arrogant, but ignorant. It would be really nice if we all had the ability to make up horses, but sadly that is NOT the case. MOST horses ridden by juniors and amateurs would benefit from an educated ride, and this is NOT an afront to anyone..only acknowledging the expertise of those that CAN make up horses for the juniors and amateurs to show. Why do dog onwers send their dogs with pro handlers? Why do race car owners pay a driver..why do race horse owners hire a jockey? If you want something done right, go to an expert in the field and then let them do their job.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey Jumphigh, are you calling me arrogant and ignorant /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif?

Just to clear my poor, singed name, I'll state that I can "make" a horse on my own, and that I have often been called to help people with their horses - by pros. No, I'm not a true professional in that I do it solely for the love of my sport and not money, but I could be... Thing is, I started riding as a kid from a non-horsey family and I learned and absorbed as much as I could over the years. Now I have to work all week to pay for my hobby, so sometimes I can't ride as often or as much as I wish, but that doesn't keep me from trying to become a better rider, and it hasn't shattered my dream of one day riding for the USET. And to become a better rider, I have to keep challenging myself and learning, and that wouldn't happen if my horse was dead quiet and perfect every time I tried to show. Granted, I'm not your average amateur, but then again, I don't seem to have the mindset of the amateurs described on this board (again, not directed at anyone in particular, just the poser-riders in general). Personally, the challenge and satisfaction of true accomplishemnt means so much more than ribbons to me, but again, I'm just a different sort of person... Please, I'm not saying anything against hard-working riders who need extra help, just that if we're supposed to be judged on riding, then maybe that's what we should be doing... I have everything against people who hop on at the gate and collect their ribbons - that's not riding!

Tiramit
Aug. 23, 2000, 05:33 PM
DMK, your posts prove that you are a horsewoman, so I wouldn't worry about this advantage thing! You're doing all the hard work and are doing what you feel is the best way for your horse to realize his potential. Anyone who takes care of her own horse and can actually drive a trailer wihout killing horses shouldn't worry about having a pro help train your horse!

Reckoning
Aug. 23, 2000, 05:42 PM
Part of being a horseman is understanding what kind of "program" works best for each particular horse. If a horse goes his best in the show ring immediately following a professional school, why is that such an issue?

I fully agree with Jumphigh. Many situations would be dangerous for both horse and rider without the intervention of a professional. Some juniors and amateurs should be applauded for recognizing their limitations and asking for help. A bad warm up in the schooling area can destroy some horses' confidence and mindset entirely, sending them into the show ring hysterical and scared. Add that to an intermediate rider, or a rider who becomes paralyzed by nerves, and four times out of five an ambulance needs to be called.


[This message has been edited by slugger (edited 08-23-2000).]

Tiramit
Aug. 23, 2000, 05:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by slugger:
A bad warm up in the schooling area can destroy some horses' confidence and mindset entirely, sending them into the show ring hysterical and scared. Add that to an intermediate rider, or a rider who becomes paralyzed by nerves, and four times out of five an ambulance needs to be called.


[This message has been edited by slugger (edited 08-23-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not to belabor a point, but why are these people showing if they can't handle schooling? PLEASE, some give me an explaination, because I'm obviously not clueing in to something!!!!!

Hattie
Aug. 23, 2000, 05:57 PM
I'm in the same boat as DMK and Colin (horse at home, meet trainer at shows,...etc) why should we be penalized? Especially someone like DMK who has a professional show her horse in the green division and then she shows in the A/O's. I never considered this a problem, however, I do see the point of others that are upset about riders who have their horses schooled until they walk into the ring. My question is where do you draw the line and how do you write this rule up? Along this same line - go to Towerheads and read the Katie and Henri Prudent interview - very interesting and upfront comments!

DMK
Aug. 23, 2000, 06:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HATTIE:
I do see the point of others that are upset about riders who have their horses schooled until they walk into the ring. My question is where do you draw the line and how do you write this rule up? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks, Hattie - this is EXACTLY what I was trying to say, but not so concisely and elegantly!

Tiramet, thank you for your kind words - they are MUCH appreciated! (although if you have seen my white-knuckled approach to driving up and down what can truly be considered SMALL mountains, you might want to take your words back! /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

Tiramit
Aug. 23, 2000, 06:49 PM
Oh Hattie, you've salvaged my afternoon. Thank you for the reference - and thanks Katie Prudent for a great interview. Gee, i suddenly don't feel so much like an outsider...

Reckoning
Aug. 23, 2000, 07:00 PM
Everyone has different strengths and weaknesses. Some people love showing but become one step away from completely undone by nerves and cannot handle the commotion of the schooling area. Much in the same way a very bright student will take his/her SAT's untimed because the pressure of the clock makes him/her unable to perform. That is just one example.
Another is an amateur rider who has little experience and education. Someone who doesn't understand the subtleties of the sport, yet wants to learn and most importantly compete. Many adults see horseback riding in the same light as tennis- a few lessons and bang! they're ready to do the Grand Prix. While such ignorance should not be encouraged, should a professional stand by idle when disaster is rapidly approaching or should a professional intervene by schooling the horse and preparing it to jump eight jumps safely? As I stated, such ignorance should not be encouraged, but does a person have to learn that lesson by becoming a quadrapalegic or seeing their horse die in the ring after a crash through a jump?
Lastly, a personal antedote. As a junior, I constantly competed against a girl with a very fancy junior hunter. This horse was always warmed up and schooled by the girl's trainer. She got on in the gate and went in the show ring. This girl rode quite well, and had previously had an extremely difficult horse whom she schooled, etc. by herself with her trainer on the ground. It was quite the discussion at horse shows when she appeared with this ultra-fancy hunter and only rode in the show ring. This poor kid had cancer. She desparately wanted to ride and show although she was very physically limited. Her parents did everything they could- bought the nicest horse they could find, had the trainer do as much as possible, had junior catch-riders show the horse to accrue points when the girl was unable to show- so this girl could enjoy SOMETHING and accomplish her goals of going indoors before she passed away. I include this story in my post to illustrate that the whole story is not always visable. There are many reasons why people do what they do at horse shows. To assume that everyone is looking to "one-up" the competition prior to showing to increase their chances of winning the all mighty blue ribbon is ludicrous. As is feeling as though these people have an advantage. Most people I know would like to be able to ride so well and so often that they wouldn't need a professional. For those of you that don't need professianal assistance, perhaps those that do are leveling the playing field by having their horses brought up to the level your horses already are at prior to going in the ring.

Jumphigh83
Aug. 23, 2000, 08:32 PM
No Tiramit I am not calling YOU ignorant or arrogant. I AM saying that that line of thinking is ignorant and arrogant. Maybe you are one of the very few that can develop a horse to its potential but MOST mortals out there (AA and AO and JR) are not and they should not be made to feel like less of a rider OR a horseman for being smart enough to know their limitations. That's all.

Hattie
Aug. 23, 2000, 08:37 PM
Ladies - I have a confession! I just got back from dinner with a good friend, who is also an A/A rider(horses at home), and we discussed this thread. One of our most pleasureable shows was when we both showed at HITS on full day care - horses on automatic pilot! Stress gone! Princesses of the day! As our horses' personal professional stall muckers, tack cleaners, etc, it was truly a luxury! As 40+ year old women, who have paid our dues, we need that trainer! (Who would ever believe that you can actually sleep until 8:00, get breakfast, and not have green goop on your breeches before you show??!!)

[This message has been edited by HATTIE (edited 08-23-2000).]

[This message has been edited by HATTIE (edited 08-23-2000).]

Sparky
Aug. 23, 2000, 09:15 PM
Hattie you are a riot and would fit in perfectly at my barn! Our clientele is made up of ladies just like you--over 40, career, relationships but no kids(or grown kids)--been there done that with the horses and now they want a pleasurable experience--we prepare their horses at a show, by getting them into the low classes before the owners arrive and making sure they see every inch of the rings and grounds in the 2 or 3 days we have before the clients start showing up. The fun and relaxation they experience is worth it to them--and all their bonding and green slobbers and baths and grazing and hacking and just plain loving happens at home. The show is just a place where they'd rather be pampered a little.

Janet
Aug. 23, 2000, 10:03 PM
With all due respect, it seems to me that a horse that NEEDS to be "tuned up" by a pro before showing is not really "suitable for an amater", which I THOUGHT was one of the judging criteria.

Hattie
Aug. 23, 2000, 11:35 PM
My observations: (caution - these are ONLY southeastern observations)

1. The A/A's at the C-rated and smaller A shows generally do not have trainers prepping their horses.

2. Trainers do prep quite a few A/A horses at the larger A shows such as HITS and WPB. I believe this is because the A/A's are VERY competitive and expensive. Any advantage over the other competitors is needed in order to be in the ribbons.

3. I daresay that 99.5% of the A/A's are "suitable to be ridden by an amateur". However even the most made animal has his quirks, for example, the horse that leans and takes you past the distance or the horse that is too quiet and you can't get him in front of your leg. The trainer just gives it that extra little "spark" that helps you be more competitive. If any of us (A/A riders) rode well enough to solve these problems then we would be doing the A/O's.

Any solutions? I worry more about the mileage rule - pretty soon none of us will be able to afford to show!!

Ash
Aug. 24, 2000, 09:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tiramit:
DMK, your posts prove that you are a horsewoman, so I wouldn't worry about this advantage thing! You're doing all the hard work and are doing what you feel is the best way for your horse to realize his potential. Anyone who takes care of her own horse and can actually drive a trailer wihout killing horses shouldn't worry about having a pro help train your horse! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What? Because someone does their own work and can drive a trailer, that makes them a better horseman then me? (I am capable of doing both and I have many times) So, if I do my own work AND drive my horse to the show, then and only then, should I not "worry" about having my trainer ride my horse. Why, because I have somehow earned it? This whole thread is beginning to sound like sour grapes........

Flash44
Aug. 24, 2000, 09:31 AM
Hattie, split the A/A division into open and restricted INSTEAD of by age.

Jumphigh83
Aug. 24, 2000, 10:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Janet:
With all due respect, it seems to me that a horse that NEEDS to be "tuned up" by a pro before showing is not really "suitable for an amater", which I THOUGHT was one of the judging criteria.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Horses are horses NOT machines and even machines ned to be tuned up occationally. After the amateur "lies" to the horse through 3 or more classes who restores the horses confidence? (ans: The trainer) Suitable for an amateur means having a forgiving nature and a sense of humor, it does NOT mean completely fool proof forever.

Tiramit
Aug. 24, 2000, 10:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ash:
What? Because someone does their own work and can drive a trailer, that makes them a better horseman then me? (I am capable of doing both and I have many times) So, if I do my own work AND drive my horse to the show, then and only then, should I not "worry" about having my trainer ride my horse. Why, because I have somehow earned it? This whole thread is beginning to sound like sour grapes........<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, all I can say is UGHHHHHH!!!!!!!! Ash, you've missed my point by a couple Million miles. Since you CAN do these things, you obviously are a horseman as well.

Somehow I've become the designated whipping boy for this thread, and I'm not sure how I let myself get so involved. If you all will go back and read my original post, you'll see that my suggestion was to add a non-riding knowledge test to all the divisions, including ponies, in an effort to truly test horsemanship and dedicated riders. My frustration (and these posts) merely is a reaction to the number of riders who don't seem to know anything about horses or their general care, including how to warm one up for a class. It's a blanket frustration for every discipline (be it jumpers or QH or National Showhorses) that stems from the belief that if you're going to do something, you might as well know as much as possible and keep a continuously growing goal. That's what keeps people young and excited about things, and it's what will keep me reading and taking courses until I'm 100...

Furthermore Ash, to suggest that our comments are sour grapes is out of line. I NEVER said I couldn't afford to have a pro warm up my horses (nor have others), I said that I'd rather do it myself as a purist rider of the show world. And for the ladies who have been there and done that, well, at least you've been there! Many of these anti-pro posts seem to be directed toward those riders, especially amateurs, who have NEVER done that, and wouldn't know how to save their lives.

Obviously DMK started this thread because she wanted to see how others reacted to this trend in the show world. Maybe everyone's is taking this way too personally, myself included, and should look at it objectively. After all, we'd rather improve our shows, and discussion is the first step. We want knowledgeable and up-and-coming horsemen filling our classes, not poser riders - at least I do...

Now, ladies, I respectively bow out of this thread. I think I'll go read Katie Prudent's interview again to reassure myself that there are indeed others like me...

Kryswyn
Aug. 24, 2000, 10:20 AM
From a former insider:

Absolutely split the classes Open/Restricted instead of by age.

That being said:
I used to ride, and show, though only a few times on the A circuit. I envied the people showing on it. My *dream* was to get nice horses and just travel the circuit. <sigh> How romantic.... Now, reading all of your opinions (all valid) and with all the c*** that goes on now in the ring and behind the scene ("Deposit Hazardous Waste HERE"), and w/ the mileage rule (that should be history/toast) I am so glad I gave it up. If I won the lottery tomorrow, other than buying some ponies back as retirees, I don't think I'd even buy one, let alone a string of fancy hunters.

I'm old enough to remember when the best *HORSE* won, not the trainer who administered the best meds, or the amateur (oh PuhLeeze!) w/ the mega thousand $$$ horse prepped by pros. This last two have an insidious argument for their use, it's kinder to the horse. "With proper pain management, Bozo can do the children's jumpers for a few more years." How about retiring the poor lame thing? "Big Name Trainer ALWAYS gets Bozo ready for me, that way I don't mess him up before a class" Take up knitting, or learn to ride, or just appreciate your horse. Riding for most a/a is supposed to be a relaxing diversion to your hectic work schedule. Why would you add MORE competition to your life? Go hack in the woods. Riding should be about the horse, please, not the chase for ribbons and personal glory. Let's remember which half of the human/equine partnership is doing 90% of the work here. In my Humble Opinion.

This is NOT a personal attack towards any of the specific posters here! You've all recited your work schedules and I agree your personal choices to use/not use a trainer to prepare are valid choices for you. But in my opinion, horse showing was more fun when the emphasis was showing off your horse to everyone (with good sportsmanship) and not chasing ribbons to increase the sales price.

Ash
Aug. 24, 2000, 10:47 AM
Tiramit-
I was not attacking you, please do not take it that way. I am sorry if I misinterpreted what you were saying.

The reason that I am getting frustrated is that I feel like people such as myself are being lumped in with that pony kid who gets on at the gate. I do not get on at the gate, I warm my own horse up before the class BUT my trainer flats my horse in the morning so I don't have to get up at 5 a.m. or so I can work 1/2 day. If it is a day when I am not at the show, yes he will school him for me. I know how to wrap, ship, tack up,bathe etc... I also hate the fact that I have little time to do this any more. I am afraid (like someone mentioned above) that a rule to eliminate trainers from riding amateur's horses would hurt the majority of us while taking care of the few who abuse the system.

DMK
Aug. 24, 2000, 10:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DMK:
Maybe an option would be to ban anyone BUT the rider from riding the horse in the schooling area for the class, once the class commences (I say that in cast the 1st years run in the ring prior to the class starting). That won't stop people who want to leave the area and school, but most shows don't let hunter riders school in pony/jumper schooling areas, and don't have a general schooling area, so I think it would be an improvement, as well as providing a "position" on the subject of horses that get schooled for the class...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ash, I share your view, and I think many do to... this was something I posted earlier in the thread. While I like the idea of a rating, or splitting classes better, if a certain governing body wanted to make an interim step (and I haven't a CLUE if they do!), would this be a good first step?

Ash
Aug. 24, 2000, 11:21 AM
I don't know how I missed that before, but a very good idea DMK! I really don't think it would be all that hard to enforce either.

My only reservation is this. What if something goes wrong in the schooling area and a trainer needs to get on to straighten the problem out? A few years ago my A/O hunter got knocked down and out (cold) in the schooling ring at Kentucky. (Yes, I thought she was dead for a minute /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif ) We obviously scratched the rest of that show. When it came time to warm up for the next weeks show-my horse would not go near a fence while there were other horses in the schooling area. (She was afraid of the horses not the fence) What quickly unfolded was me having a semi meltdown (I was nervous and things were not going well!) and the horse getting worse. My trainer was able to hop on and pop her over a few jumps and she was fine in the ring.

Should I have scratched? (There was nowhere else we were allowed to school) Risked injury by just going into the ring and not having her warmed up? Risked losing confidence in my horse and her losing confidence in me?


[This message has been edited by Ash (edited 08-24-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Ash (edited 08-24-2000).]

Magnolia
Aug. 24, 2000, 11:29 AM
Thank You Kryswyn!!!
Horses are a wonderful part of our lives! Who cares about winning ribbons! Showing should be about fellowship, and doing your best and showing off your horse to the best of your ability.
Showing is about us the people - at it's best it is something you work towards, taking pride in your abilities, acheiving goals. At it's worst, it is an ego battle, with little in mind beyond winning that stupid 50 cent ribbon.
Guess what - if you weigh your success on your ribbons, you'll never be happy - someone will always have a fancier horse, a better trainer, better meds. But, if you look at it as - did I do my best? Did I acheive my goals? you may be satisfied.
Also, it disgusts me that people drug lame horses just to win some ribbon. That stinks sooooooo much. I can't imagine how much these horses are pounded that they need bute everyday! That is animal cruelty - as bad as beating your horse! Good god, when your back hurts do you pop an aspirin and go lift weights? Why should your horse have to? I ride at a barn where horses are hunted, evented, ridden almost daily - not one is on "theraputic" bute. And rarely are any lame.
I hope that the majority of riders are good people with the best interest of the horse at heart. It seems like most of us are. We need to get the ego out of competition and bring the sportsmanship back!

lisa
Aug. 24, 2000, 12:35 PM
How do you think a $250,000 horse became that way? Because it got tons of pro rides. And it probably still needs tons of pro rides to keep it tuned, winning, and worth that much.

That said, I see nothing wrong with pro rides in an open division, or to help with a greenie, or tuning rides.

I hate to see made horses and ponies "set up". Learn to ride!! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

As I posted on another thread, last year at the Maclay regionals, pros were on the jrs horses right before the class. _That_ should be against the rules.

But I have more of a problem with shamateurs in the amateur division than I do with those amateurs who have to have their horses set up for them...

Magnolia
Aug. 24, 2000, 12:57 PM
Ash-
I'm not suprised you got knocked down in a warm-up. Schooling and the warm-up ring are not for the faint of heart! I remember the chaos that was schooling (baby greens always seemed to school with beginners and short stirrups!). It is dangerous. Show management ought to make organizing it a priority! Anyhow, I'm glad your OK!

Ash
Aug. 24, 2000, 01:55 PM
You are right Magnolia. Schooling sessions can be quite frightening! Can you believe they charge you for that insanity?

In this case it was just a small schooling area-2 jumps for 25+ horses.

DMK
Aug. 24, 2000, 02:01 PM
Ash, I guess if you pay AND survive, you must really feel as if you cheated the devil, eh?

That has been my greatest fear in life, and the one thing I have to compliment Bob Bell on at Biltmore - Huge schooling areas!

I thought about your concern, and while it doesn't all the way address it, I suppose if the restriction was only while the class was run, the trainer could school in the warm up earlier in the day...

Ash
Aug. 24, 2000, 03:28 PM
Do you guys see a lot of people just getting on at the gate? I have really given it a lot of thought today and I can honestly say that I don't see this too often. I know a lot of A/O's that have their trainers ride their horses for them but not right before the class. The two times I did get on at the gate I hated it!! I need at least a few jumps to get my eye working....

Flash44
Aug. 24, 2000, 03:59 PM
Ash - that was obviously a pretty freak accident! I'ev almost landed on top of a pony after a jump during schooling - couldn't see the little critter behind all the brush and why was he hiding behind thejump anyway?

No matter what rule someone makes up, there will always be the logical exception. Maybe they could do an Adult Amateur Horsemanship Division with handy classes, verbal questions, demonstrations (bandaging, etc) and restrict this division to horses that don't do higher than 3'3 and are not shown or ridden by a pro at that show. maybe do a combo class where you flat someone else's horse and jump one line. Instead of judging the horse 100%, judge teh rider some percentage as well so the really good rider wtih the not so fancy horse can compete.

In MD, we have an NCEL winter circuit based on the IHSA. You are asked verbal questions at some point in time, though I'm not real familiar with the league. Teams travel to different barns and ride the host barn's horses.

Ash
Aug. 24, 2000, 04:25 PM
Ohh! I love the idea of an A/A horsemanship division... especially changing horses!! Now that would be fun to do and I think it would be very interesting to watch.

Tiramit
Aug. 24, 2000, 06:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ash:

Tiramit-

I was not attacking you, please do not take it that way. I am sorry if I misinterpreted what you were saying.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



No problem Ash - sorry for being sensitive! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Smiles
Aug. 25, 2000, 12:17 AM
Some of you guys have some good input on this topic. I wish I could have given my thoughts on this a little earlier, but here it is. I hope it doesn't get over looked! First someone said that if you can't ride at the level your competing at then you shouldn't be showing. (Example a novice rider in the A/A.) Well my thoughts are why don't we give the novice divison a rating? Or would that be pushing it? This would most likely create the need to raise the money given out in the A/A, but there would be a place for those Novice people to compete and get alittle piece of it too!

Next there is a reason why they have green divisons, but they should have them show on different days then when the Amatuers show. This would solve the problem of the horse getting to go over the course with the trainer, and then an hour later the Amatuer gets their turn for their class.

Finally I don't have a problem with trainers schooling a horse. I mean some horses just need the trainer to get on and fix problems. What I do have a problem with is over schooling. Where the horse knows the trainer better then his owner! If you need your trainer to do that much then maybe you shouldn't be showing!

[This message has been edited by Smiles (edited 08-25-2000).]

Zaboobafoo
Aug. 25, 2000, 01:32 AM
I've been on both sides here...and my views tend to conflict with themselves, but hey, here it goes!!

When it comes to my horse, I aviod other riders at all cost...he's MY boy, and as long as I'm not damage, we'll figure things out together. If anything goes wrong, its my fault, and I'll fix it! Only 3 times in over 3 years has a pro gotten on his back...once because he was losing confidence when we moved up a divison, once to help me with our flatwork(my dressage trainer got on) and once because we were having basic spooking silly problems and I wanted my trainer to see if she could fix it...there's a point to know when to get off and ask for help, but I always try me first....

HOWEVER, I worked for my trainer for three years, and there is nothing more annoying then having a horse go poorly because the owner is unwilling to get off and let us help. I'm not saying that the trainer should fix the horse for you...but it is much easier to help fix any problems with you ~ one, know exactly the sequence of aids that fixes it; two, if its the more the horse or more the rider; and three, you can work on it some yourself, with more consistent, more correct riding(there's a reason the pros are pros and the ammies are ammies!). Its also a great feeling to put a nervous ammie on a horse that you know has already trucked aroun the course and now that it will be at its best...now that even if the ammie makes a mistake, the horse has his thinking cap on and will be in caretaker mode. As others have said, horses aren't machines, you don't always know what you are going to get...if the pro hops on and jumps a course or even a few schooling area jumps before you go, they have a LOT better idea.

Now this isn't to say I think ammies should be sitting at the ingate keeping their bots clean, then get the leg-up and on in. But I think a proper balance of trainer rides and ammie instruction makes for happy horses /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Dottie

Spunky
Aug. 25, 2000, 11:58 AM
This is MY reaction to some of the posts here. If it works for me, great, it's my choice, if others choose differently, great, it's their choice!! As long as we are all having fun and SUPPORTING each other in the sport we LOVE!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jumphigh83:
Some adults and jumiors are NOT capable of training their own horse and I applaud them for having the common sense to get help.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I totally agree that not everyone can make their own horses . . . and that they SHOULD get help! To me, this includes schooling at home and at a show. For ME, I think warming up for a class is part of MY job of showing (and part of the fun, and the learning!)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jumphigh83:
There is NO sin in having someone better than you 'set up' your horse. It makes more sense than screwing up youself OR your horse. . . I think knowing what you DON'T KNOW is more important than knowing what you DO know.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think knowing your own limitations is important too. But if a person can't warm up his/her own horse before a class, it stands to reason that the class itself is beyond his/her limitations.

Separately, I don't agree with making more rules! Don't we have enough? Maybe splitting the divisions DIFFERENTLY instead of by age would work, but who's going to monitor? And, if there is a screwup in the schooling ring as somebody mentioned, it's important for the trainer to be able to fix it before it does become disastrous. Why should this disqualify an otherwise qualified round?

Let it go, have fun, do what you need to do to get you and your horse ready. I see people showing all the time who look HORRIBLE and obviously DON'T belong, and I'm NOT showing because I don't have the right combination of time/money and OK I'M A CHICKEN!!! even though I ride just fine at home, but that doesn't mean I want to spoil someone else's fun!! I just hope that they don't get hurt! (well, OK, I might chuckle evilly in secret if they get dumped. LOL! But I also clap loudly when they get back on! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif)

[This message has been edited by Spunky (edited 08-25-2000).]

Van Teal
Aug. 25, 2000, 12:14 PM
Smiles in zone 2 we have a "novic" division for the adults, it's called Pre-adult and the fence height is 2'6" while it does not get year end awards for Zones, it does get year end awards for the local organizations.

Janet
Aug. 25, 2000, 12:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Smiles:
First someone said that if you can't ride at the level your competing at then you shouldn't be showing. (Example a novice rider in the A/A.) Well my thoughts are why don't we give the novice divison a rating?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'll probably be accused of being old fashioned, but, IMHO, if you can't ride at a certain level of competence, YOU SHOULDN'T BE SHOWING.

Someone earlier said something about liking taking the "adult beginners" to the same shows as the Junior Hunters.

Why are the "adult beginners" showing? They should be working at home until they are no longer beginners.

Someone else referred to riders that knew they weren't good enough to show without the trainer prepping the horse. Good- then they should know that they AREN'T READY TO SHOW AT THAT LEVEL.

I always thought the purpose of showing was to demonstrate that you and the horse have reached a certain level of accomplishment.

IM(Not So)HO, if you and your horse are not accomplished enough to put in a decent round WITHOUT needing the trainer to tune up the horse- you (and your horse, and your trainer) should be AT HOME working on developing that level of proficiency. Not at a show trying to win ribbons by whatever means possible.

OK, I said I was old fashioned.

Bascule
Aug. 25, 2000, 12:35 PM
Janet: I absolutely 100% agree with you. That is what schooling shows are for, not the rated shows. By the time you get to the A-level shows, you should be skilled enough to get yourself around and your horse should be confident enough to be a steady partner. Otherwise stay home or compete at a lower level. How rewarding can it be to spend hundreds upon hundreds of dollars to do the A's when you or your horse aren't ready?

A-level pony clubbers don't start out at the A level. They start at the bottom and work their way up. Only the strongest and most dedicated survive.

[This message has been edited by Bascule (edited 08-25-2000).]

Spunky
Aug. 25, 2000, 12:40 PM
Janet, you ARE old-fashioned! /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif But I don't think that's a bad thing! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif So many people lament that showing has changed, it's not fun anymore. Maybe it's not, or maybe it's fun for a different group of people (the people who are new to riding and showing?).

It does seem that the goals have changed, and that the goal of riding is to go to shows and do well in classes. It used to be, and for so many people it still is, to become a better rider and for the ones who are already better riders, to make nice horses for themselves and others.

It may be difficult to reconcile when people have different goals in showing (they tend to behave in ways that seem strange, alien, unthinking, careless, etc.) but really there is not much to be done about it. We can't control other people, we can only control our own actions.

What I think is important is that we continue to have discussions & that the leaders in our sport such as Linda Allen (who is extermely visible to us online and also does not have the current unfortunate controversies against her that George Morris does) and many others (the Prudents for example in their Towerheads interview) continue to seek ways of change that will (1)strengthen the longevity of our sport and (2)accommodate everyone who wants to participate.

Magnolia
Aug. 25, 2000, 01:26 PM
You know, I read something about the Survivor winner, Richard. Basically, he deserved to win cause he played the game the best. The game was about surviving, not being nice.
I got to thinking, maybe that applies to showing, the hunter game is about having the nicest looking trip, not about being a good rider or horseman. If the nicest looking trip is created by having a trainer school a horse to death then so be it, i guess.
Subjective sports will never be fair. Luckily there are many unsubjective horsesports!
Also, if your not competitive at "A" shows because you can't afford a packer, or you don't want your trainer showing your horse, go to local shows!
Just as an aside, do alot of trainers push their ammys and juniors to do the "A"s?

MsHunter
Aug. 25, 2000, 01:35 PM
Bascule, you stated earlier that "you train your horse". By definition doesn't that make you a trainer who doesn't except renumeration for services? Just a point to ponder, but I will say a ground person helps most people out. And, as an aside, when I prep my clients horses it is only hacking. Make sure they aren' t going to kill them at the show, make sure they feel sound, make sure I get them carrying themselves correctly. Isn't jumping 95% flatwork anyway?

Ash
Aug. 25, 2000, 01:50 PM
Magnolia- you are so right! Horse sports are not the only sport with the 'win at all costs' attitude. We see this in the anorexic 14-year-old gymnast, the track star who abuses steroids and the team owner who spends millions to buy the best players. Is it right? No way, but it is a fact of life. People will do anything to win!

To answer your question, I think a lot of trainers push their students to show because there are more $$$ to be made at the shows, then giving lessons at home.

MsHunter
Aug. 25, 2000, 01:55 PM
No Ash, unfortunately yesterday I was gone 18 hours and made 100 dollars. And, one was left with me from a show the day before of another trainers, to get her "qualified". This is called a professional working with another professional professionally! I do it because I love it, not for the money. I could make more at home teaching for 8 hours
than I could at a show EVER. This holds true for all of us. And sometimes, we'd rather NOT be at the show we are at, but are there to please our client(s). If you are in Zone 2, August is a VERY tiring month.

Janet
Aug. 25, 2000, 02:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by magnolia:
I got to thinking, maybe that applies to showing, the hunter game is about having the nicest looking trip, not about being a good rider or horseman. If the nicest looking trip is created by having a trainer school a horse to death then so be it, i guess.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Absolutely. That is how "the game" is currently defined.

The object of the discussions here is (I think) to discuss ways in which we think the rules/objectives of "the game" should/could be changed, for the benefit of the riders, the horses and "the sport". (And from my perspective, that means developing better riders AND better horsemen.)

Bascule
Aug. 25, 2000, 02:44 PM
Jane: Thanks for your input. Yes, I guess in theory you can look at it that way. Not sure what your point is though. Yes, I train my horse. I have had good training over the years that has taught me how to stand alone and make decisions.
I take pride in the fact that my wins are my wins and nobody elses. When someone rides against me and my horse, they are only riding against me and my horse and our experience together, not my trainer, etc. I would feel like crap, if I took any of my rides or winnings because someone else tuned my horse for me. That is just a personal choice and I think a part of true horsemanship. People have lost sight of what this was supposed to be about-- to learn to ride and improve, not to make sure the trainer gets on 15 minutes earlier next time. I am not anti-trainer. I just think at this level there should be some sense of purity. Do your homework at home. Come to the shows to see if you did it right. If you didn't go back home and work until you get it right. Shows should be testing grounds, not the place for training-wheels. JMHO.

[This message has been edited by Bascule (edited 08-25-2000).]

Ash
Aug. 25, 2000, 02:53 PM
Jane, I was referring to the A shows. I agree, taking one student to a one-day show is not going to make you money if you have many lessons you could have taught at home. But if you are a trainer that takes 15 horses to a multi day show and is collecting $75+ a day daycare, $50+ rides and $75+ a day in trainer fees you are going to make more $$ then if you stayed home and taught those people lessons. (If you have an up-down business, that is a different story) If you, as the trainer, know you are going to a show, why not push people to go? It is more $$$ right? You canÂ’t be at home to teach lessons anyway. I am not faulting anyone for this-it is the economics of the horse world!

MsHunter
Aug. 25, 2000, 03:11 PM
let me just say that the pro ride is regional I think. It isn't everywhere you see it all the time. I know in New England it is quite popular, as a young pro I know and I argue all the time about this. I find horses my customers are capable of riding. how long it takes to get into the show ring is dependent on how hard one wants to work, and how green the horse is that was bought.
Regardless, we always find a suitable quality animal. I try to stay away from the pro rides other than hacking and keeping them fit, as this is important to me. Many trainers tell me their clients will leave if they don't provide results (i.e. the win) and they feel they have to ride, to ensure the win. Some of them I think want the win as quickly as the customers do. But I think that is why there is a barn for everyone, a trainer for everyone etc, it is a free enterprise.

MsHunter
Aug. 25, 2000, 03:19 PM
No point bascule, just comments to think about. I am wondering if you are at an advantage if you are a professional amateur? vs one that is learning how to ride, and needs a trainer, etc. I never have prepped my horses for my clients before, and don't intend to in the future. The hacking is most recent at the clients request, I have all green horses and or green riders in my barn. You would never catch me sitting on one for a client that knows its job. I will however sit on one when the client tells me it is pulling, and we are working on that at home, so i can decide things like which bit I may use that day etc. I am really on the fencepost with this one. It never makes me feel like the pro rided ones have an advantage as I think I do my job very well with my 2 feet on the ground, so it has never been an issue to me. With so many quasi pros, I wonder if the pro ride helps or if the horse gets tuned to the pro instead of to the clients ability? Anyway,
we have always done fine, we just take a longer time to get there, but, I also think our horses stay sounder because of it.

Pewter
Aug. 25, 2000, 03:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jane Ervin:
I do it because I love it, not for the money. I could make more at home teaching for 8 hours
than I could at a show EVER. This holds true for all of us.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While this may hold true for you personally, it most surely is NOT the case that most trainers I know on the A circuit would make more money staying at home teaching lessons. At a show where training fees can be $100 a day, times say... 10 people, trainer's hotel and food expenses paid for by customers, day care (which $ does NOT go to the grooms), it does not take a scientist to figure out that successful trainers are making big bucks. Hopefully, of course, they also enjoy it...

Spunky
Aug. 25, 2000, 03:23 PM
I see a couple of young shingle professionals in my area go to the schooling shows and show their clients' horses to death over 2'6"--even at schooling shows.

Now, that is clearly a case of the pro wanting the ride, even if their clients are totally capable. Is this happening elsewhere, or is it isolated?

Colin
Aug. 25, 2000, 03:26 PM
I completely agree with you, Pewter. Why else would top trainers spend all of their time at horse shows? For the love of it? I think not! FOR THE $$$$$$$$$$$

They make a FORTUNE at the shows! It would be a much easier life to stay at home and teach lessons -- imagine...a "home"???? Instead, they bust their butts, living on the road, and not for fun -- they make big $$

Tiramit
Aug. 25, 2000, 03:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jane Ervin:
I am wondering if you are at an advantage if you are a professional amateur? vs one that is learning how to ride, and needs a trainer, etc. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This isn't directed at you, Jane, but my mom has an old saying she loves to tell her children...

"There will always be those who have more than you, and those with less, those who are better, and those who are far worse, the goal in life is to constantly try to improve one's self and work toward a worthy goal. Be your best at everything you do.."

If Bascule isn't making money off of her personal work with her own horse, she's an amateur. Period. No one is calling for a limit on the horses' talent, so why put one on the hard working riders? If that's the case, why not split the division for horses that cost under $85,000 and have to be ridden and one for those over that price who can do the trip on their own, regardless of who's on their backs...?

By the way, isn't everyone training EVERY time they get on a horse? Problem, as stated by most people here, seems to be that most riders are putting in NEGATIVE training that has to be countered... Something else to think about.

Bascule
Aug. 25, 2000, 03:40 PM
Professional amateur? No. Proficient amateur? Yes! I don't make a dime doing it my way. The "adults" are supposed to be a division for those of us who have to make a living doing something else besides horses. Because those people have a distinct advantage. It isn't supposed to be another division for a professional on remote, which is what is too often happening.

Tiramit: Well said.

[This message has been edited by Bascule (edited 08-25-2000).]

Flash44
Aug. 25, 2000, 03:43 PM
"Why are the "adult beginners" showing? They should be working at home until they are no longer beginners."

Why let any beginner show? Make 'em stay home until they can jump 3'!!! Including those little short stirrup riders! And why don't we just shoot the leadliners! They can't even steer, and half the time don't even want to be there.

Don't start penalizing people because they are just learning to ride. If they want to show, LET THEM. But put their division at the end of the day and not at rated shows. Beginner classes should be a very positive experience for the rider so that they keep coming back and develop into tack-buying new-attire-wearing trainer-paying point-chasing check-writing adult ammies. Duh.

Colin
Aug. 25, 2000, 03:46 PM
I know SEVERAL beginners that show in the 3' AA division on the "A" circuit! They have only been riding LESS THAN A YEAR! Why do they show? Because it is FUN! Why does the trainer let them? Because the trainer makes MONEY. Why does it work? Because the beginner has enough money to have a safe mount that takes care of her.

What's wrong with that??? NOTHING! The rider is benefiting by have a fun recreational sport. The trainer is benefitting by more business. The horse is simply doing his job at the 3'.

Bascule
Aug. 25, 2000, 04:01 PM
Sorry Colin. That scares the ever-loving hell out of me. I don't particularly want to show anywhere near those people. They don't have the scope of experience to handle problems. Those people need to pay their dues at the local level. I'm not sure if I am more appalled that this happens or by your attitude. The same amount of fun can be had at a lower and safer level. When they are just getting started they don't know the difference.

I have an analogy. You do not put dancers on pointe until they have mastered everything in slippers. No matter how much they scream and cry they must wait. Just because they go out and purchase pointe shoes doesn't mean they get to go on pointe. Once technique is flawless in slippers then they start working the same technique on pointe. This takes years!!!

Harris
Aug. 25, 2000, 04:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bascule:
Sorry Colin. That scares the ever-loving hell out of me. I'm not sure if I am more appalled that this happens or by your attitude. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree, Colin....appalling...just appalling...

Ash
Aug. 25, 2000, 04:19 PM
What is the difference if you show at 3' locally or if you show at 3' at an A rated show? We are not talking about Grand Prix here, it is the three foot adult hunters! Geez, I jumped 3’6” in the hunt field as a child- on a medium pony …...

Also, please do not think that because my trainer rides my horse, I am not a proficient amateur.

The difference between a dancer and a rider is until a dancer develops the proper muscles (which takes years) they are physically UNABLE to go en pointe. The same is not true for a novice rider showing in the 3 foot.

[This message has been edited by Ash (edited 08-25-2000).]

Magnolia
Aug. 25, 2000, 04:28 PM
These people that Colin says have been riding one year and jumping 3' courses must have some talent. If you can do it at home it doesn't really matter where you ride. Personally, if I was a had only ridden for one year I don't know that I'd make the investment to show the "A" circuit, but hey, to each his own!
I just hope that these riders don't go in that all crazy schooling ring! That could be scary!

Tiramit
Aug. 25, 2000, 04:32 PM
You know, something just occurred to me.. Maybe all the over-faced riders are causing these problems in the schooling area...

Forgot to mention that this is just a joke, not meant to be taken literally /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif!

[This message has been edited by Tiramit (edited 08-25-2000).]

Spunky
Aug. 25, 2000, 04:49 PM
Hmmm, seems this thread has taken a turn towards "Beginners in the Show Ring?"

I've said before that the H/J world is very exclusive. /infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif First, it's gotta have money, then it's gotta be good AND have money . . . where oh where is "Gotta love horses and riding and jumping and showing!" ??? Shouldn't that be all that is required??

I don't think we should exclude anybody from our sport. We should welcome and support and encourage everyone who wants to ride--including Shannon whats-her-face, including beginners who have the good fortune to be nice babysitters. We need to ACCEPT people in order for our industry to be successful, not EXCLUDE them because their ideas don't fit with ours. Maybe our own attitude is part of what prevents lots of exhibitors at our shows.

If my own ideas of what showing should be prevent me from showing, that is my own choice. Good trainers will always be valued, and there will always be people who do want to learn to ride and can't afford that nice horse to pack them around a 3' course in their first year of riding. And there will always be the clients who will go to the trainer who finds them that packer and lets them show in that division, and who leaves the trainer who doesn't let them show.

Janet
Aug. 25, 2000, 10:50 PM
Rapidly backpedalling.

I realize I overstated the case (about beginners) to make a point.

I don't really mean that you shouldn't be ALLOWED to show until you have developed proficiency. I know that I have, at various point in my life, bitten off more than I could chew. And learned from the experience.

What I really mean is that we should not set the standards to this lowest common denominator. We shouldn't let the needs of the "not yet proficient" rider determine the standards for the rest of us.

IN(not so)HO, we shouldn't let the "fact" that a less than proficient rider "needs" the trainer to tune the horse be the prime reason to OPPOSE a rule change which would say that "no one other than the enterd rider is allowed to jump the horse at the show".

Smiles
Aug. 25, 2000, 11:12 PM
Spunky, Shannon whats-her-face. That gave me a laugh thanks. Doherty thats her last name for what it's worth! Consider this not all people show for the ribbon, points, or money. Maybe it's just fun, and if they want to do it at an "A" show level so be it! Folks I think we have gotten away from the "FUN" Part of this sport! It's being with our horses and friends! Everthing else is just detail.

Flash44
Aug. 26, 2000, 11:12 AM
Good points, Janet. Maybe at the A level, hunters should be expected to be able to negotiate a small bank or liverpool, or at least more handy type courses with bending lines, etc. I've kind of lost my inspiration to do the rated shows since I can jump the exact same courses at local shows for half the money.

Duffy
Aug. 26, 2000, 12:13 PM
Hmmmmm...Lots of thoughts and ideas here. First, I think there needs to be a distinction between children and adults, those aspiring to be professionals and olympians (or even just 3'6") and those just plain wanting to have a good time, small successes, small goals and NOT aspiring to the grander heights of riding/showing.

Speaking from an adult amateur prospective (but with a hopefully budding 9yr old LOL), I see quite a difference between a trainer hopping on an A/A horse at the crack of dawn and maybe even *gasp* jumping it over a few jumps to do their utmost to assure the highest chance/probability of success for the adult later in the day. That is part of a trainer's job, IMO. That is part of what they are being paid to do. Show "prep" is very different from show "warm-up". Even if I don't necessarily "prep" my horse at every show, I do "warm-up" at least myself on my horse. (Sometimes I need a lot more "warming-up" than my horse does. LOL)

Part of the reason why I go to shows is to ride/show, but another very big reason is to socialize with the friends that I've made over the years who I don't see except at the shows. This is why I even go to shows when I'm not showing on a pretty regular basis. (That and to cheer on my friends!!) I also like to go out to dinner with these friends, etc. Sorry - getting off track here. What I'm trying to say, is that showing for at least some, is not JUST to prove something to oneself or to someone else as to how well one's done their homework...

Also, speaking from one who does plenty of
"homework" when I can, as well as plenty of bonding...I don't think I should be "judged" by others as to what I choose to do or not do while at shows with regards to prepping or taking care of my horse. Sometimes I choose to do less or more, depending on whether the assistance is there and available and/or whether I have the energy or desire to do it on a given day. That should be my choice, IMO.

Fortunately or unfortunately, my trainers pretty much only go to the rated shows, so that is where my kids will show as well, for the most part. I try to use my judgement, as well as my trainer's, as to when they are going to be ready, which shows, etc. If that means getting a pony jock to get on my kids' pony to do my best job as a parent to make sure that my child has a safe and good time riding, then so be it. Again, you don't see my child at home doing everything she physically can for her pony...Sometimes she does more than other times...Sometimes she's not in the best of moods, but she's human as well! (and stubborn and opinionated, etc LOL) But, I'd like to think that she'll remain at the walk/trot, short stirrup level until she can manage to do most of her own "training" on her pony. Knowing myself and my trainer, that's probably a good bet. /infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif But, in the meantime, if her pony needs some training, tuning up, correcting, whatever, I'm very happy that we have pony jocks in our barn that are capable to do it. This just helps insure that she will have a good and SAFE time while in this early learning process. Does this make me an over-protective mom, perhaps making my child into one of those "posers". I AM a mom, so maybe I am over-protective at times. But, I'm also trying to do my best to make sure that she becomes a rider AND horsewoman. She loves to watch our vets and farriers, and asks lots of questions. Her favorite grooming tool is hoof paint, LOL. She loves to paint her pony's nails!

I'm sorry this has gotten so long and has gotten off track as well. I've been so swamped recently, I haven't had much time to post, let alone read the BB and I sort of (ok, I did) ramble on a bit here...I hope ya'll will forgive me. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Hattie
Aug. 26, 2000, 12:23 PM
Well said Duffy! You know you are a true adult amateur when, you look forward to going out to dinner with your friends after the show!LOL

DMK
Aug. 26, 2000, 02:22 PM
Hattie... do you mean there was ANOTHER reason why we went to shows? /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Hattie
Aug. 26, 2000, 02:52 PM
No....DMK you are an A/O, you must remain serious......3'6" is BIG, you can't make the mistakes that we do...so it's early to bed for you!!!LOL

DMK
Aug. 26, 2000, 05:34 PM
I think it's back to A/A for me!!!! /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Harris
Aug. 26, 2000, 06:18 PM
Okay....fess up Duffy....going out to those bizarre nightspots is the MAIN reason you go to shows!!!!

rusty
Aug. 26, 2000, 06:49 PM
I hope i don't start rambling to much and manage to make som sort of sense. These are just my opinions so take them for what they are worth. /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

As far as beginners at rated shows, if that is the level their trainer goes to and there are the appropriate classes then they should beable to go. If I could I would much rather take my kids to the rated shows, the courses are nicer.

Pros riding amature horses, I think under normal circumstances the A/A or A/O should be able to warm up their own horse, (and themselves) before the class. If they want their trainer to show the horse in a different division it should be their choice.
Some people need to work for a living and can't be at the horse show all of the time.
They also want to go have fun with their friends so they pay the day fees and groom fees to allow them to do that.

The course yes I would like to see more challenging courses that are interesting and fun to ride with banks and wter and fun stuff like that. But I also don't want to see the hunter classes that we have today disappear either.

Maybe a handicapping system for the horse/rier combination. Like they do in polo to help level the playing field, of compition. It sounds like a lot of people are frustrated be cause they don't feel competive the way the system is set up. I probably should have posted this on Linda Allen's thread. Sorry to have rambled, y'all are lucky I am tired of typing. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

Twister
Aug. 27, 2000, 01:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bascule:

Also, something else I feel strongly about (for myself at least). If I can't fix any problems myself or with me on my horse and my trainer on the ground, then I shouldn't be showing at the A level. That is when it is time for me to school and do homework---- at home.

[This message has been edited by Bascule (edited 08-23-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

To me, it sounds like you think the average A/A should be able to train their own horse. I can't imagine why someone so capable would be wasting their time at the A/A when they could be winning in he greens or the a/os!

Twister
Aug. 27, 2000, 02:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Spunky:
[B
I don't think we should exclude anybody from our sport. We should welcome and support and encourage everyone who wants to ride--including Shannon whats-her-face, including beginners who have the good fortune to be nice babysitters. We need to ACCEPT people in order for our industry to be successful, not EXCLUDE them because their ideas don't fit with ours. Maybe our own attitude is part of what prevents lots of exhibitors at our shows.

If my own ideas of what showing should be prevent me from showing, that is my own choice. Good trainers will always be valued, and there will always be people who do want to learn to ride and can't afford that nice horse to pack them around a 3' course in their first year of riding. And there will always be the clients who will go to the trainer who finds them that packer and lets them show in that division, and who leaves the trainer who doesn't let them show. [/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Spunky, you are so smart!. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Justbay
Aug. 27, 2000, 03:38 PM
I haven't read through this entire thread, but I must agree with Duffy and also what Rusti said (other than he handicapping thing?).

I have an adult horse that has no pro rides at shows or home anymore - he knows his job now, but we used to do the greens(pro) and a/o (me) with pro schools in the AM before we got to this point. If I thought he needed a tune up- in a heartbeat he would get one.

I have several greenies now that have both pro and me train on. Pro rides it and I do, been doing it this way for years and years- since green pony days! Works for me and I would not change a thing. Do I like doing some things myself-YES! Do I like having pro sit on my horse- YES! The more info/input the better. I would never do it ALL by myself.

AND, I wouldn't plan on having a pro jump on to warm up right before I went in the ring, BUT if I was having a problem right before my class, I wouldn't hesitate! Can't say I have seen this as a normal occurance.

Usually, pro schools horse in AM and maybe shows in warm-up or earlier division. Then student schools before his/her division and goes directly into the ring.

Cudos to you Bascule for having the satisfaction of doing it all on your own! Seriously! You are entitled to your opinion.

And for the 3' "beginners" at A shows - more power to them- I hope they are having fun. I do not have a problem with it. "Apalling"- hardly!!

Okay, those are my thoughts!

Spunky
Aug. 28, 2000, 10:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Twister:
Spunky, you are so smart!. /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thanks Twister! /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Always love a compliment, especially on Monday morning!! LOL

Lisa Cook
Aug. 28, 2000, 11:11 AM
I originally brought up this topic on another thread, but then promptly left on vacation so I have not followed up.

On another thread, the idea was brought up by Snowbird to make A and AA shows really special, cream of the crop shows, so to speak, that people would have to qualify, or earn the right to enter. At that level, in my opinion, real amateurs should be able to school and ride their horses themselves, without trainers doing all the work. For people who want trainers to tune their horses up, then they can ride in the other shows.

With the current rating system, where anyone who wants to can show up and ride in the A shows, then I agree that it is impractical to implement a single rider policy, unless, as has been mentioned, this division is added to what is already in place.

Hattie
Aug. 28, 2000, 01:00 PM
Hi Lisa! Just curious - do you show in the adult amateurs or amateur owners?

Bascule
Aug. 28, 2000, 01:09 PM
Ash: Just a correction, but it doesn't matter how strong the dancer. If the technique isn't there it isn't going to happen. At least, that is how the best schools train their dancers. You are missing the point (no pun). Riding should require the same commitment.

Lisa Cook
Aug. 28, 2000, 01:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HATTIE:
Hi Lisa! Just curious - do you show in the adult amateurs or amateur owners?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I hope my answer doesn't invalidate the point I was making regarding hunter/jumper shows /infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif, but I currently show a newbie from the race track in combined training (beginner novice level this year), with a couple of forays into schooling jumper shows. As my horse becomes more experienced, I will show him a bit more in the jumpers.

I used to ride hunters (adult amateur) for several years, before I found that I liked the speed and challenge of the jumpers and combined training.

My ideas around having only the rider who competes the horse being allowed to show the horse (at certain shows/divisions)comes from the combined traning competitions, where this rule is in effect even at the very lowest levels. At first I was amazed at the idea (I did ride hunters for awhile, after all), but I've come to appreciate it, and I think it has personally made me a better rider.

ccoronios
Aug. 28, 2000, 02:08 PM
(asterisks added)

"Anne, I very much like your idea. There would be some problems with enforcement and the riders and trainers would have to go on *the honor system* in part, but it is an excellent idea."

?????????????????????????

ccoronios
Aug. 28, 2000, 02:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kryswyn:
From a former insider:
I used to ride, and show, though only a few times on the A circuit. I envied the people showing on it. My *dream* was to get nice horses and just travel the circuit. <sigh> How romantic.... Now, reading all of your opinions (all valid) and with all the c*** that goes on now in the ring and behind the scene and w/ the mileage rule, I am so glad I gave it up. If I won the lottery tomorrow, other than buying some ponies back as retirees, I don't think I'd even buy one, let alone a string of fancy hunters.

I'm old enough to remember when the best *HORSE* won, not the trainer who administered the best meds, or the amateur (oh PuhLeeze!) w/ the mega thousand $$$ horse prepped by pros. This last two have an insidious argument for their use, it's kinder to the horse. "With proper pain management, Bozo can do the children's jumpers for a few more years." How about retiring the poor lame thing? "Big Name Trainer ALWAYS gets Bozo ready for me, that way I don't mess him up before a class" Take up knitting, or learn to ride, or just appreciate your horse. Riding for most a/a is supposed to be a relaxing diversion to your hectic work schedule. Why would you add MORE competition to your life? Go hack in the woods. Riding should be about the horse, please, not the chase for ribbons and personal glory. Let's remember which half of the human/equine partnership is doing 90% of the work here. In my Humble Opinion.

...But in my opinion, horse showing was more fun when the emphasis was showing off your horse to everyone (with good sportsmanship) and not chasing ribbons to increase the sales price.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've been trying to formulate a response... now I don't need to - you just said it all.

ccoronios
Aug. 28, 2000, 03:04 PM
"Originally posted by Bascule: Sorry Colin. That scares the ever-loving hell out of me. I'm not sure if I am more appalled that this
happens or by your attitude."

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Harris:
I agree, Colin....appalling...just appalling...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Me, too, Colin..... I find this attitude (obviously held by many) to be very frightening - not only for the immediate danger of participating in a sport and at a level for which you aren't prepared, but - almost more - for the damage done to the sport in general by advocating/condoning this practice.

Ash
Aug. 28, 2000, 03:10 PM
WHEN? When was horseshowing fair? When did only the best horse win? I remember when horseshowing was ONLY a rich person's sport. It was elitist and political-much more then it is now! If you didn't belong to a big name money family you better just forget it! But now people like Emily Williams and Kelly Farmer can win at the National because even though the resources were not there, the talent was.

I also remember when there were NO DRUG RULES!(at least they weren't enforced, if they even existed)) People always showed on ace and pain killers-no one thought anything of it. Older professionals like Rodney Jenkins could tell you stories that would make your hair stand on end! No one wanted to win any less 'back then' The things that went on to get the jumpers ready pale in comparsion to what we see now-plastic chips-HA! Try barbed wire and rails with electricity running through them! Remember there were no stewards in the collecting rings back then.

I am not sure where this horse show fairy tale took place-but it certainly wasn't any where near the rated shows in the past 40-50 years!

Some people will do whatever it takes to win. I am not saying it is right, it is just a fact of life.

ccoronios
Aug. 28, 2000, 03:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bascule:
Ash: Just a correction, but it doesn't matter how strong the dancer. If the technique isn't there it isn't going to happen. At least, that is how the best schools train their dancers. You are missing the point (no pun). Riding should require the same commitment.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Absolutely!!! And dancers don't have to account for another brain/opinion/attitude to deal with!

Ash
Aug. 28, 2000, 03:44 PM
QUOTE]Originally posted by Bascule:
Ash: Just a correction, but it doesn't matter how strong the dancer. If the technique isn't there it isn't going to happen. At least, that is how the best schools train their dancers. You are missing the point (no pun). Riding should require the same commitment.[/QUOTE]

My point was: you cannot stand in toe shoes (en pointe) with out the proper muscling. It is physically impossible to do. Once you get the proper muscles you CAN go en pointe EVEN if your technique isn't perfect. Will your instructor let you? No, but physically you CAN do it. Riding at the grand prix level takes years of practice as well. Would your instructor let you do the grand prix after one year of riding, hardly! But that is not what we are debating here. I think it would be fair to compare a beginner adult rider to a 3rd level ballet dancer. Capable of performing many movements (showing in the Adult Amateurs) but not capable of going en pointe (Grand Prix) If your argument is valid-then all riders would have to be capable of performing at the highest level in order to perform at a lower level.

Am I missing something here?

Hattie
Aug. 28, 2000, 05:43 PM
Why is everyone getting so bent out of shape?
We are talking about the adult amateurs here!
I know very FEW that show in it just to collect ribbons and up the sale price of their horses! Have you seen the majority of us ride? Most are good, however inconsistant! We do it for fun and getting away from home on the weekends! Getting some good ribbons is the icing on the cake! So what if your trainer hops on your horse to correct a problem that you have caused from your unsupervised riding at home. I have to say that I haven't witnessed trainers schooling an A/A horse up to the point that the rider hops on the horse to go in the class (ok maybe once). I'm frustrated because this seems to have become a more heated issue than lets say... the mileage rule and lack of membership representation in the AHSA!

[This message has been edited by HATTIE (edited 08-28-2000).]

[This message has been edited by HATTIE (edited 08-28-2000).]

Colin
Aug. 28, 2000, 06:55 PM
Hey there, Hattie -- had to ruin your roll here, but the only reason I showed at Tahoe was a) to Win; and b) to sell my horse! LOL!

Although I'm usually quite inconsistent, I had to really get it together for that show! LOL! Sea Urchin is the same way -- we go to win! But the best part is that when we don't win, we still have a blast!

And, let me tell you.....having Carleton Brooks show my horse for 2 days in the low hunters made all the difference in the world when I showed -- which is what helped me to win -- and to sell my horse -- and to have fun.

xoxoxoxo, bets

Hattie
Aug. 28, 2000, 07:33 PM
Oh Colin - I almost mentioned "except for Colin". You are one of the few! Hey more power to you - send me some of that extra money! LOL

Duffy
Aug. 28, 2000, 07:38 PM
But Hattie, Colin won't have any money left over after the Middleburg soiree at Mosby's!!!

Colin
Aug. 28, 2000, 07:42 PM
Hattie & JustBay - already spent it ALL -- on TWO NEW BAY MARES!!!LOL! Green as can be -- believe it or not, the best, most broke horse I have right now is my 2 year old paint!!!! LOL!

Richard! :D
Aug. 28, 2000, 08:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colin:
I know SEVERAL beginners that show in the 3' AA division on the "A" circuit! They have only been riding LESS THAN A YEAR! Why do they show? Because it is FUN! Why does the trainer let them? Because the trainer makes MONEY. Why does it work? Because the beginner has enough money to have a safe mount that takes care of her.

What's wrong with that??? NOTHING! The rider is benefiting by have a fun recreational sport. The trainer is benefitting by more business. The horse is simply doing his job at the 3'. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Your very right. Also 3' is not big. I mean ANY horse that is sound can jump 3'. What is the point in having a professional if they cant tune up your horse. I mean THATS WHY THERE ARE PROFESSIONAL DIVISIONS. im sorry but i cannot miss school to ride in the pregreen during the week and loose. Thats WHY i have a trainer. She rides my horse in the professional division and I do the childrens. It works out well. If the A/A wants to have the trainer show in the warmup then thats FINE. If you dont want to ride against trainers DONT SHOW IN THE WARMUP..

Justbay
Aug. 29, 2000, 10:22 PM
Colin, did you say 2 BAY mares??? UMMMMMM...very interesting!!LOL..

Oh yes, I also too like to go and win, and if it takes a pro-ride to tweak it that much to make it better-- YES! YES! YES!!!!!!!!!