The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct. 21, 2009
    Location
    South Central: Zone 7
    Posts
    1,962

    Default What do you think of the new rule changes?

    I couldn't find a thread already about this, so I hope I am not starting a thread about something already discussed. What do you think of the rule changes for the hunter divisions set to go into effect in December? I am mainly wondering what people think about the restructuring of open divisions. Here is a quick overview:

    Conformation Hunters will have only 2 divisions (1st year greens at 3'6" and Regulars at 3'9"). They dropped the 2nd year and I believe they slightly changed the way they weighted things (30% conformation, 70% performance with 1/2 points for the models).

    They have changed the Regular Working Hunters into High Performance hunters (still at 4' I believe)- just a name change. They also are adding Performance hunter division at 3'6"-3'9" and a division at 3'3" (for horses that no longer are eligible for green or pregreen).

    Also they are changing from a point system to a 'money won' system for the open divisions only. It sounds like derby money will go towards division year end awards as well.

    (All of these are discussed in a series of videos on the USHJA website).

    So how do you think this will change things? I personally think the conformation hunter change sounds like a good idea- that division was seriously hurting and I hope the change can renew some of its popularity. I am not quite sure what I think of the performance divisions- my only worry would be that the lower division might take away from the 4' division (which is hurting already). Hopefully as they raise the height of the derbies as they originally intended to do, the 4' division might gain back some numbers.

    I think the change from points to money won will be interesting. I think we will see some smaller shows go under and some of the bigger shows might possibly grow even more since people will start to make more decisions based on prize money. I also wonder how this will effect B shows... they have taken a really big hit (at least here in zone 7), I would hate to see them disappear altogether.

    One last comment- during the video Geoff Teall kept referring to these divisions as the professional divisions and it reminded me of some angry COTHers a while back... it made me laugh out loud.



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar. 5, 2007
    Posts
    1,704

    Default

    psst..
    The rule about points = $ won is already in effect.

    Model points have been half points for like a billion years.

    Derby $$ already goes to 'pick a division' for points. In fact there is a rule change proposal to stop that practice.

    etc etc etc



  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    14,977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hntrjmprpro45 View Post
    Also they are changing from a point system to a 'money won' system for the open divisions only. It sounds like derby money will go towards division year end awards as well.
    I don't love that idea.

    I think the derbies are a fantastic innovation that have really stirred up a lot of fresh interest in the sport, but I don't think the derby prize money should be lumped in for year end awards.

    There are some horses that do well in the derbies that are spectacular jumpers, but not fantastic movers. Since there is no under saddle portion of the derby, it doesn't hurt them too much in those classes. Movement might be factored into their overall score, but not considered separately.

    However, I don't think those horses should be able to win some hefty derby prize money and leapfrog in the year-end standings over horses who show in full divisions that include the under saddle classes.

    A true classic hunter should be a great jumper but also a beautiful mover, and I wouldn't like to see the standings for year-end winners skewed away from that ideal by the inclusion of the derby prize money.



  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct. 21, 2009
    Location
    South Central: Zone 7
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by S A McKee View Post
    psst..
    The rule about points = $ won is already in effect.

    Model points have been half points for like a billion years.

    Derby $$ already goes to 'pick a division' for points. In fact there is a rule change proposal to stop that practice.

    etc etc etc
    I have been mainly showing baby greens this year with some 5 year olds so I hadn't noticed the rule had already changed for the prize money to points.



  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct. 21, 2009
    Location
    South Central: Zone 7
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MHM View Post
    I don't love that idea.

    I think the derbies are a fantastic innovation that have really stirred up a lot of fresh interest in the sport, but I don't think the derby prize money should be lumped in for year end awards.

    There are some horses that do well in the derbies that are spectacular jumpers, but not fantastic movers. Since there is no under saddle portion of the derby, it doesn't hurt them too much in those classes. Movement might be factored into their overall score, but not considered separately.

    However, I don't think those horses should be able to win some hefty derby prize money and leapfrog in the year-end standings over horses who show in full divisions that include the under saddle classes.

    A true classic hunter should be a great jumper but also a beautiful mover, and I wouldn't like to see the standings for year-end winners skewed away from that ideal by the inclusion of the derby prize money.
    Thats a good point- especially since some of the derbies that I have seen are barely more than classics. Don't get me wrong I have seen some impressive courses but I have also seen some that were not challenging enough to be considered a Derby.



  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep. 6, 2003
    Location
    WA, Land of the damp Thongpend
    Posts
    2,451

    Default

    What Geoff keeps calling Professional divisions are OPEN divisions as to rider eligibility. Anyone can and probably will ride in them. Especially the 3'3" - 3'6" Performance hunter - can you say warm up for Jr and A/O hunters?

    There are no divisions/classes/sections that exclude all riders except pros.



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    14,977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hntrjmprpro45 View Post
    Thats a good point- especially since some of the derbies that I have seen are barely more than classics. Don't get me wrong I have seen some impressive courses but I have also seen some that were not challenging enough to be considered a Derby.
    That's the thing. There are "derbies" and then there are DERBIES!

    For sure, I'm glad to see the proliferation of all of them, but some of the smaller, less competitive derbies have winners that might not be competitive with the top hunters in the country. Which is fine, but I don't think the prize money from the smaller derbies should vault those horses up the standings for Horse of the Year.



  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct. 21, 2009
    Location
    South Central: Zone 7
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seal Harbor View Post
    What Geoff keeps calling Professional divisions are OPEN divisions as to rider eligibility. Anyone can and probably will ride in them. Especially the 3'3" - 3'6" Performance hunter - can you say warm up for Jr and A/O hunters?

    There are no divisions/classes/sections that exclude all riders except pros.
    I know, I thought it was funny because earlier some thread came up and there were many that were truly upset by it being called a "professional" division- some even saying that they are called pro divisions so that ammies are scared off (like some kind of conspiracy). I just found it amusing...



  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep. 6, 2003
    Location
    WA, Land of the damp Thongpend
    Posts
    2,451

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hntrjmprpro45 View Post
    I know, I thought it was funny because earlier some thread came up and there were many that were truly upset by it being called a "professional" division- some even saying that they are called pro divisions so that ammies are scared off (like some kind of conspiracy). I just found it amusing...
    I know you know. It is just that many "professionals" call them the pro divisions. Which is ridiculous.

    I actually went to the rules changes and commented that the wording needed to be revised. There is no such thing as a professional division.



  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr. 22, 2006
    Posts
    831

    Default

    I'm obviously way behind the curve but when did they start the 3'3" A/O division?
    And is that just offered at AA shows?



  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    14,977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trees4U View Post
    I'm obviously way behind the curve but when did they start the 3'3" A/O division?
    And is that just offered at AA shows?
    IIRC, 2009 was the first year it was offered as an A division. I don't think it has to be only at AA shows. It seems to have caught on. They did have it at Harrisburg last year.



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep. 28, 2001
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    4,329

    Default

    Regular Conformation model classes have been full points up until now.

    Low AO section started last year; it can be offered at any rated show.



  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan. 2, 2007
    Location
    Alpharetta
    Posts
    2,120

    Default

    It doesn't bother me they call them professional divisions, as we have our AA and AOs, but they are really open to all as we know.
    I like the idea of 3'3 and 3'6"-3'9" performance hunters, finally we have a divison under 3'6" in whick we can win a USEF award.
    I am lucky enough to own a really special, (IMO) horse that I want to keep around for a long time, and at this point I really do not want him to jump 3'6". He will be my AA/AO at 3' and 3'3". So there is no reason for him to jump 3'6", except if that was the only way to compete at the USEF national level, with a pro.

    But there is one thing I'm wondering, if a horse is eligible for pregreen 3'3", would you show in that pregreen or the performance hunter? Obviously in the performance hunter there will be every level of experienced horse competeing against you.



Similar Threads

  1. Rule changes - amateur rule - has it changed?
    By retreadeventer in forum Eventing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Jan. 20, 2012, 01:37 PM
  2. One Fall Rule
    By MeghanDACVA in forum Eventing
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: Jan. 11, 2011, 11:06 AM
  3. Vest Rule
    By Riverview in forum Eventing
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Nov. 20, 2010, 07:18 PM
  4. Proposed Rule Changes
    By MyGiantPony in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 226
    Last Post: Jan. 5, 2007, 04:26 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •