[xrailgoddess]

I think we're just looking at balance here. If the owner is an active competitor and holds the majority of the shows in the region, of course they should compete. However, the owner may want to be more sensitive and selective in the classes they choose to compete in to avoid resentment and foster trust and goodwill.

For example, if the intention of the class is to give non-pro riders a 'nations cup' experience, should you ride your 1.60 horse as the 1.30 rider on the team? You can, nothing in the rules preclude you from doing so, but 'should' you? I'm just thinking of optics and good public relations, not just staying within the rules. If there was nothing precluding an Olympic sprinter from competing in a junior high track meet, but they did and won every class, would that be a 'good' decision?

I agree that a lot of GP horses would struggle in a hunter derby class, however I believe the intent of that class is to give hunter riders a GP experience, not to give GP riders a hunter experience. The same is true with some of the other classes, the intent was to give 'ordinary' riders who don't compete on the international scene a chance to compete in 'big money' classes.

I believe in Europe most federations have regulations stipulating that horses and/or riders who have earned a certain number of points or placings at a certain level cannot drop down, or must move up. We do not have that rule, and I think we all know competitors who drop down to a big money 1.20 or 1.30 class from their usual competitive height for that class or show.

I also don't really buy the giving the 1.40 - 1.60 horse experience argument. While I do completely agree it is beneficial for the horse to drop lower to maintain confidence etc., there are schooling classes, clear round classes and training days that can provide that experience without entering these horses in classes intended for less accomplished horses/riders.

Because we don't have rules excluding this practice I think the pro's have an obligation to be 'self-policing' and be a bit more sensitive in their selection of classes. Show owners absolutely should compete in their own shows I believe, but they also may want to be astute in their selection of classes to foster a positive image of good sportsmanship.

[axl]

I think we're just looking at balance here. If the owner is an active competitor and holds the majority of the shows in the region, of course they should compete. However, the owner may want to be more sensitive and selective in the classes they choose to compete in to avoid resentment and foster trust and goodwill.

For example, if the intention of the class is to give non-pro riders a 'nations cup' experience, should you ride your 1.60 horse as the 1.30 rider on the team? You can, nothing in the rules preclude you from doing so, but 'should' you? I'm just thinking of optics and good public relations, not just staying within the rules. If there was nothing precluding an Olympic sprinter from competing in a junior high track meet, but they did and won every class, would that be a 'good' decision?

Here you have me, but if the intent of the class is such it should be clearly stated in the rules, i.e. for those who have never competed for CET/USET.

I agree that a lot of GP horses would struggle in a hunter derby class, however I believe the intent of that class is to give hunter riders a GP experience, not to give GP riders a hunter experience. The same is true with some of the other classes, the intent was to give 'ordinary' riders who don't compete on the international scene a chance to compete in 'big money' classes.

I believe in Europe most federations have regulations stipulating that horses and/or riders who have earned a certain number of points or placings at a certain level cannot drop down, or must move up. We do not have that rule, and I think we all know competitors who drop down to a big money 1.20 or 1.30 class from their usual competitive height for that class or show.

I also don't really buy the giving the 1.40 - 1.60 horse experience argument. While I do completely agree it is beneficial for the horse to drop lower to maintain confidence etc., there are schooling classes, clear round classes and training days that can provide that experience without entering these horses in classes intended for less accomplished horses/riders.

Because we don't have rules excluding this practice I think the pro's have an obligation to be 'self-policing' and be a bit more sensitive in their selection of classes. Show owners absolutely should compete in their own shows I believe, but they also may want to be astute in their selection of classes to foster a positive image of good sportsmanship.

I disagree. The intent of the class is to restore brilliance to the hunter ring.
Dropping from 1.60 to 1.20 purely to scoop up prize money at your own show is poor sportsmanship IMO, but if my 1.60 horse has been stopping, struggling, or is returning from a layup I'm perfectly justified in still entering money classes. There's no reason I should only enter schooling classes.

[The Alternate]

Thanks for the replies guys. It's amazing how many different opinions there are on this subject.