The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 61
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Sep. 19, 2002
    Location
    recent FL transplant from IL
    Posts
    7,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doublesstable View Post
    All I could find on the no black stirrup rule was a DRAFT...

    http://www.usef.org/documents/ruleChanges/174-12.pdf
    EQ110.4 is effective 12-1-2013 for the Equitation classes.

    http://prc.usef.org/reports/USEFSear...EQ&compyear=12
    "I'm not crazy...my mother had me tested"



  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct. 14, 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,681

    Default

    [Letter I wrote to USHJA] For some reason this is just bugging me. I know it's probably too late but worth a try.........


    Well it is too late... off to find material to "cover" my black stirrups. LOL
    Last edited by doublesstable; Feb. 14, 2013 at 01:43 PM.
    How people treat you is their KARMA.... how you REACT is yours!



  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan. 30, 2009
    Posts
    1,237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doublesstable View Post
    I have concerns about this revision due to the fact I use Royal Rider stirrups that are black for pain issues not to hide anything. They are shock absorbing and help me with the knee pain and shin splints I have developed over the years of riding in regular metal fillis irons. I know I am not alone in this case.
    It has been mentioned numerous times already, but you seem to be missing the point of the rule. It is the COLOR that the judges don't like. There is no problem with jointed stirrups, or Royal Rider stirrups, or anything else. It is the fact that they are BLACK.

    USEF is not trying to hurt your knees.

    As many people have already said, all you have to do it change the COLOR of your stirrups. No one even has to buy new expensive stirrups. Just paint them, or neatly wrap them in tape.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep. 19, 2002
    Location
    recent FL transplant from IL
    Posts
    7,173

    Default

    I spent last weekend at a show as an announcer sitting right next to the judge so I got to observe quite a bit. Honestly, there were plenty of times when I saw riders with the black stirrups (didn't matter what brand, but the color) & it was hard to tell if they had their stirrup or not. This was with a variety of colored horses.

    I do understand now why the rule was proposed after that experience cause prior to that I too would have been questioning if it really is that hard to tell if a rider is with or without their iron.
    "I'm not crazy...my mother had me tested"



  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct. 14, 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmyByNature View Post
    It has been mentioned numerous times already, but you seem to be missing the point of the rule. It is the COLOR that the judges don't like. There is no problem with jointed stirrups, or Royal Rider stirrups, or anything else. It is the fact that they are BLACK.

    USEF is not trying to hurt your knees.

    As many people have already said, all you have to do it change the COLOR of your stirrups. No one even has to buy new expensive stirrups. Just paint them, or neatly wrap them in tape.
    I clearly understand that... it's still a stupid rule.

    I didn't say anyone is hurting my knees... but the reality is the RR that are made with Dupont plastic with shock absorbing material ARE BLACK.

    I did plead with RR to make a lighter color and not black and they are looking it to it.

    Also, if you don't think this is a goofy rule - what would you think if they made you wear white gloves? I would rather see a riders hands vs their feet. IMHO.

    To me it's just about so many petty rules... I do get the color issue and will do what I have to to accommodate my use of my RR...... like a sleeve or paint....
    How people treat you is their KARMA.... how you REACT is yours!



  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct. 14, 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Giddy-up View Post
    EQ110.4 is effective 12-1-2013 for the Equitation classes.

    http://prc.usef.org/reports/USEFSear...EQ&compyear=12
    Thanks so much... I could not find that......

    Well okay then elimination it is. I read where they were considering leaving it to the judges discretion and not elimination... Oh well.....
    How people treat you is their KARMA.... how you REACT is yours!



  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan. 30, 2009
    Posts
    1,237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doublesstable View Post
    I clearly understand that... it's still a stupid rule.

    [snip]

    Also, if you don't think this is a goofy rule - what would you think if they made you wear white gloves? I would rather see a riders hands vs their feet. IMHO.
    Judges don't seem to think it's a stupid rule, since they're the ones who asked for it.

    When you are a judge you can decide that a rider's hands are more important than their feet. Black stirrups are a new thing -- a thing that makes it harder for judges. Black gloves are not a new thing, and if judges started to complain they could put in for a rule change about that.

    In fact, if it bothers you, you're welcome to submit a rule change about white gloves in the eq. They sure would get disgusting pretty fast, though. Wouldn't stay white for long.



  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct. 14, 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmyByNature View Post
    Judges don't seem to think it's a stupid rule, since they're the ones who asked for it.

    When you are a judge you can decide that a rider's hands are more important than their feet. Black stirrups are a new thing -- a thing that makes it harder for judges. Black gloves are not a new thing, and if judges started to complain they could put in for a rule change about that.

    In fact, if it bothers you, you're welcome to submit a rule change about white gloves in the eq. They sure would get disgusting pretty fast, though. Wouldn't stay white for long.

    I like as much dark as I can due to dirt LOL...

    But upper level Dressage riders wear white gloves and don't seem to have an issue. And to be clear, I would NOT support white gloves in the EQ. Just making a point that I think no black stirrups is not a rule I would support but I am not on the committee that regulates the USEF rules.

    I have junior judged many times so I understand the dynamics. And it is my opinion that the hands are more important and can decide that regardless if I am a judge or not.

    And I'd would think the support for this rule change was not unanimous among judges...
    How people treat you is their KARMA.... how you REACT is yours!



  9. #29
    Join Date
    May. 3, 2011
    Location
    Zone 5
    Posts
    51

    Default

    It isn't a stupid rule. Think about it . . . black boots, black irons, dark bay horse. How can a judge see that from across the arena? The stupid part is that nobody thought to insert the words "or magnetic" between "black" and "stirrups" in the rule. They should be illegal in the eq. divisions. It's cheating.



  10. #30
    Join Date
    May. 22, 2012
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
    It isn't a stupid rule. Think about it . . . black boots, black irons, dark bay horse. How can a judge see that from across the arena? The stupid part is that nobody thought to insert the words "or magnetic" between "black" and "stirrups" in the rule. They should be illegal in the eq. divisions. It's cheating.

    Think about it too - black gloves, dark reins, dark bay horse... same thing and your not saying that's a problem.

    If someone drops a stirrup and you don't see it well good on them...
    If you really want to do something, you’ll find a way. If you don’t, you’ll find an excuse.



  11. #31
    Join Date
    May. 3, 2011
    Location
    Zone 5
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie locks View Post
    Think about it too - black gloves, dark reins, dark bay horse... same thing and your not saying that's a problem.

    If someone drops a stirrup and you don't see it well good on them...
    I'm simply saying that I understand the reasoning behind the rule. My real gripe is that they haven't banned magnetic stirrups.



  12. #32
    Join Date
    Dec. 12, 2009
    Posts
    663

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
    I'm simply saying that I understand the reasoning behind the rule. My real gripe is that they haven't banned magnetic stirrups.
    Though I agree that the magnetic stirrups are not appropriate for the equitation, I can't think of how USEF would determine one is using them. Take a look at the OnTyte system... does it look any different? http://www.doversaddlery.com/ontyte-...on/p/X1-07083/



  13. #33
    Join Date
    Dec. 10, 2012
    Posts
    689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iEquitate View Post
    I can't think of how USEF would determine one is using them.
    It would take about five seconds for a steward at the entry gate to check. All you need is a little bar of steel. Ask rider to remove foot from stirrup and drop metallic object on stirrup pad. If it stays, well I guess you found a magnetic stirrup.



  14. #34
    Join Date
    Aug. 22, 2009
    Posts
    970

    Default

    Maybe the rule should be changed to clarify that everyone can use black stirrups but only if they wear white boots?


    3 members found this post helpful.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Sep. 27, 2000
    Location
    Southern California - on a freeway someplace
    Posts
    9,534

    Default

    So black is not allowed, but you could use really dark navy?? Just kidding. But this is reminding me of the FEI rule a few years back that attempted to define allowable coat colors based on some (numerical?) color system. There were jokes about using apps to measure the colors.



  16. #36
    Join Date
    Oct. 14, 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peggy View Post
    So black is not allowed, but you could use really dark navy?? Just kidding. But this is reminding me of the FEI rule a few years back that attempted to define allowable coat colors based on some (numerical?) color system. There were jokes about using apps to measure the colors.
    That's true.. you could say they are navy... LOL

    The rule changes doesn't go in to effect until December of 2013 so Royal Riders has some time to make non black stirrups

    I was told in an email from the USEF (they did respond the same day - I was very impressed) that since the main manufacturer of black composite stirrups makes them in silver that they felt there was no reason not to pass the rule. I would assume they meant Royal Riders. I did search for silver Royal Riders and cannot find any. I did email Royal Riders asking about silver ones and I have not got a response.

    So we have time.... My old bod needs the shock absorption.
    Last edited by doublesstable; Feb. 16, 2013 at 01:32 PM.
    How people treat you is their KARMA.... how you REACT is yours!



  17. #37
    Join Date
    Jan. 22, 2011
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    332

    Default

    Hasn't USEF said in the meetings that it is ok to spray paint them silver? No one has to go out and buy new stirrups.



  18. #38
    Join Date
    Nov. 30, 2006
    Posts
    837

    Default

    I don't know if this "shimmer" would be too much "shimmer", but it says it is fully chip resistant after 7 days. http://www.krylon.ca/ca/eng/products...allic_shimmer/



  19. #39
    Join Date
    Mar. 13, 2006
    Posts
    632

    Default

    So, I am guessing this also includes the herm sprenger stirrups with only the black rubber on the sides?



  20. #40
    Join Date
    Oct. 14, 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HorseLuvr View Post
    So, I am guessing this also includes the herm sprenger stirrups with only the black rubber on the sides?
    I would write USEF an email and ask. I think they are referring to the all black ones but they don't have a list or description of what exactly they are prohibiting so they are going to get hit with some questions for sure.
    How people treat you is their KARMA.... how you REACT is yours!



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. Kwik-Out stirrup owners: attaching a stirrup pad??
    By jn4jenny in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Jun. 10, 2011, 11:41 AM
  3. What do you think of the new rule changes?
    By hntrjmprpro45 in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Aug. 22, 2010, 01:42 PM
  4. Short Stirrup Equitation vs Short Stirrup Hunter
    By twhs in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Apr. 28, 2010, 04:14 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
  •