The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 105
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Oct. 3, 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    5,064

    Default

    I would also like to know where the $25,000 pony jumper classes are so I can hook up the trailer. As it is around here, I still pay more for the NAL Classic class but there hasn't been any prize money. It isn't usually a great amount but at least my daughter felt like she and the pony were helping to pay their way.

    It is frustrating when the CH/Adult jumpers always have a money class.



  2. #42
    Join Date
    Mar. 22, 2005
    Location
    Where it is perpetually winter
    Posts
    5,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tuckawayfarm View Post
    I share supershorty's frustration at Ch/Ad classes now offering more prize money than some of the higher performance classes, but I have to wonder how she would have felt about getting a saddle instead of a check if her parents weren't able to pay her show bill.
    Sell the saddle. Probably more money than I'd win in a class anyway!

    My parents feel very strongly that there is a line between doing something as a hobby and doing it as a sport. It may be elitist, but that's how they feel about it and that's what I was brought up with. I don't know much about other sports because I've always only been in riding, but I know that juniors and amateurs in figure skating do not win money. Ever. And that sport is just as expensive, if not more so, than riding is. I'm not entirely sure why riding is different from most sports in the sense of giving out a large amount of prize money to juniors and amateurs.

    The fees at horse shows are absurd. They nickel-and-dime you to death, and I think there's an issue there... but that is not the same issue as whether 1.10m horses should be winning the same kind of money as 1.45m horses. High performance riders pay all those fees too, and on top of them, have to pay a "high performance fee" for any National Standard classes (plus the nominating fee). That's something completely different than the question of prize money, and if there is prize money, how much.
    Last edited by supershorty628; Jan. 22, 2013 at 08:20 PM.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Oct. 2, 1999
    Location
    Mendocino County, CA: Turkey Vulture HQ
    Posts
    14,715

    Default

    I think the article is really good.

    My perspective on prize money is this: for the most part, the people who win it are the people who are already doing well.

    If prize money is coming solely from outside sponsorships, that's fine: paying back prizes to entrants is a good thing.

    If prize money is coming from entry fees, then it is destructive, especially at the lowest levels. It is taking money out of the pockets of the beginners and those with the least resources and paying it to the people who are already successful.
    If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket


    4 members found this post helpful.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Nov. 30, 2005
    Location
    Northfield MN
    Posts
    1,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by supershorty628 View Post
    Sell the saddle. Probably more money than I'd win in a class anyway!
    Might not be able to get that done in time to pay the entry fee for the next week's Prix. As that would have been her motivation to do well in the Jr/AO classes, a prize check was much more convenient.

    Without the opportunity to cover most of the cost, many young riders would not have the means to compete at the upper levels. I think this sport is elitist enough without further reducing the options for success.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jan. 27, 2000
    Location
    On Blue Run
    Posts
    1,493

    Default

    Prize money should increase exponentially with degree of difficulty. Which, by the way, in many cases, it already does.
    What is hard to swallow for some is the 10K Adult Classic every weekend (at WEF, for example) while the 1.40 horses are jumping for 6k.
    I find myself in agreement with NARG's theory however I think they need to approach their goal from another angle. Possibly they cold re-direct their efforts toward recruiting sponsorship.
    What is to be considered is the possibility that sponsorship money is earmarked for a specific division.
    I think it is important to understand the need for professionals to develop young horses with less expense to owners. This should be a goal and an off shoot of increased prize money.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eclipse View Post
    Although I admire you greatly for everything you have accomplished, why do you agree?

    Do you not feel that in order for us ammie/jr's to advance that show fees must be brought down and they need to stop gouging us at every chance? Do you not then also feel that horse prices must also be lowered to give more of us a chance to advance to higher heights (trust me, a lot of people have the skills they just don't have the $$$$$)? Or do you feel that because we cannot afford the ridiculous price of a higher level show horse we shouldn't even be trying to win what little money we can to try to cover exhorbant show fees....or even bigger question, do you feel that show fees are not that exhorbant?

    Not trying to be snarky, I am generally interested in another perspective!
    How do you think the entry fees will be brought down while maintaining high prize money???

    See my example:
    Pre green stake hunter class WITH prize money = $850 entry
    Pre greens at Old Salem WITHOUT prize money = $250 entry

    Kappler's article is about REDUCING show fees, by REDUCING the prize money expense to the horse show managers.

    People on this thread either can't do math or want to have it both ways.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  7. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tuckawayfarm View Post
    Without the opportunity to cover most of the cost, many young riders would not have the means to compete at the upper levels. I think this sport is elitist enough without further reducing the options for success.
    I think there's another way to look at this. If the prize money in the olen jumper division was better than the Jr and amateurs, then good riding young professional would have equal opportunities as the jrs and amateurs. For example if the prize money for an open 1.30 class was more than the low juniors, then the owner of a horse for sale or just the owner of a horse without a rider would be more inclined to give it to a good young professional then a junior. Right now these horses all go to juniors because the competition is less and the prize moneys more so it's a no brainer. This rule isn't for elite international riders- they have plenty of prize money and owners willing to pay whatever it costs. It's for professionals trying to work their way up to that level and the owners who are willing to support them before they become beezie and McLain. And it's for juniors and amateurs too who want to be able to compete against their peers and not against riders who would be professionals if their amateur status wasn't so lucrative.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Apr. 28, 2008
    Posts
    7,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meupatdoes View Post
    How do you think the entry fees will be brought down while maintaining high prize money???

    See my example:
    Pre green stake hunter class WITH prize money = $850 entry
    Pre greens at Old Salem WITHOUT prize money = $250 entry

    Kappler's article is about REDUCING show fees, by REDUCING the prize money expense to the horse show managers.

    People on this thread either can't do math or want to have it both ways.
    So show in the division and not the stake. All my green horses have always gone in just the regular division until they were competitive/had a chance to win in the big money class on Sunday (with the corresponding big entry fee). You are not required to enter the "big class" to show in the division. Most of the time you can hold off entering until you see how your week is going. If your horse is having a bad week, skip a class you are likely to lose. If it's going really well, skip the division class on Saturday so your horse is fresh for Sunday. Not rocket science -- and not bad math -- to want an OPPORTUNITY to enter a class that might help offset fees.

    I can't recall ever having been to a show where the Children's/Adult Jumper "Classic" was higher in prize money than the corresponding Jr/AO Jumper "Classic" at the same show. It might be more than in the Jr/AO division classes, but the regular C/A classes have lower prize money in their division classes than the Jr/AOs too.

    Not to mention, most of the "classics" are sponsored anyway, so it's not coming out of the show manager's pockets. They incur whatever expense they have in obtaining the sponsorships. I would imagine it is MUCH easier to find a sponsor for a Sunday "Classic" filled with pomp and circumstance than a Thursday 1.3m open class that nobody, including the person who won it, is likely to remember next week, too.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb. 1, 2001
    Location
    Finally...back in civilization, more or less
    Posts
    11,514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ruby G. Weber View Post
    Prize money should increase exponentially with degree of difficulty. Which, by the way, in many cases, it already does.
    What is hard to swallow for some is the 10K Adult Classic every weekend (at WEF, for example) while the 1.40 horses are jumping for 6k.
    I find myself in agreement with NARG's theory however I think they need to approach their goal from another angle. Possibly they cold re-direct their efforts toward recruiting sponsorship.
    What is to be considered is the possibility that sponsorship money is earmarked for a specific division.
    I think it is important to understand the need for professionals to develop young horses with less expense to owners. This should be a goal and an off shoot of increased prize money.
    I totally agree that there needs to be more of an effort to find sponsors (which of course also means coming up with classes that sponsors WANT to support - certainly a whole other thread!)

    I understand those who say that prize money should go up as the difficulty level of the class rises. But that is only true to the extent that shows are run primarily for the development of upper level riders, IMO.

    Show managers are business people. They design class offerings - obviously including prize money - to attract the most (and most lucrative) customers. At this point, I believe that those are the juniors and amateurs who make up the majority of exhibitors - and who pay the freight for BOTH the show managers and the trainers. Offering them the opportunity to win back some of those exorbitant expenses is good business. THAT is why you see a 10K Adult Classic on the weekend, after all.

    It would be lovely to find a way to reduce the expenses to owners who are trying to bring along nice young horses, but I really don't see how cutting the prize money paid (to attract) juniors and amateurs is going to affect that. I mean, I already have a couple of saddles; I don't want to win another one. I'll take the cash, thanks very much.
    **********
    We move pretty fast for some rabid garden snails.
    -PaulaEdwina


    1 members found this post helpful.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Feb. 28, 2008
    Location
    missouri
    Posts
    1,158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meupatdoes View Post
    How do you think the entry fees will be brought down while maintaining high prize money???

    See my example:
    Pre green stake hunter class WITH prize money = $850 entry
    Pre greens at Old Salem WITHOUT prize money = $250 entry

    Kappler's article is about REDUCING show fees, by REDUCING the prize money expense to the horse show managers.

    People on this thread either can't do math or want to have it both ways.
    i think the point some are making is that we have little faith that show managers will reduce fees, and that show entries are only a smaller portion of the entire expense.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Jan. 2, 2007
    Location
    Alpharetta
    Posts
    2,129

    Default

    You can already choose to ride for prize money or not at the lower height divisions, there are usually several schooling hunter non rated divisions that entry fees are less.

    The other thing is even if prize money was removed, it would not be that great of a reduction of entry fees and probably only in the previous prize money classes.

    I'd like to see the profit and loss statement of a few shows to get an idea of where they really do make their profit, I suspect a portion is from stall fees and extra fees. AT least to get an more informed idea of how to proceed on this topic.



  12. #52
    Join Date
    Nov. 30, 2005
    Location
    Northfield MN
    Posts
    1,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by showjumper1 View Post
    I think there's another way to look at this. If the prize money in the olen jumper division was better than the Jr and amateurs, then good riding young professional would have equal opportunities as the jrs and amateurs. For example if the prize money for an open 1.30 class was more than the low juniors, then the owner of a horse for sale or just the owner of a horse without a rider would be more inclined to give it to a good young professional then a junior. Right now these horses all go to juniors because the competition is less and the prize moneys more so it's a no brainer. This rule isn't for elite international riders- they have plenty of prize money and owners willing to pay whatever it costs. It's for professionals trying to work their way up to that level and the owners who are willing to support them before they become beezie and McLain. And it's for juniors and amateurs too who want to be able to compete against their peers and not against riders who would be professionals if their amateur status wasn't so lucrative.
    As a breeder who prefers to get my youngsters to the ring before selling, I agree that better money in the open divisions would be helpful. However, we already have young jumper classes with reduced entry fees that IMHO are underutilized. On the downside, better money means higher entry fees and would attract the more finished horses. Not going to give my greenbean young jumper much of a chance when the jump-off becomes a rat race.

    I would disagree about more sales horses being offered to young pros instead of juniors. It is much better advertising to have a horse performing on the weekend in the division it is marketed for and when prospective buyers are on the grounds. Having a young pro showing it during the week doesn't have the same impact, not to mention the pro will want to be paid, increasing the expense to the owner.

    As for juniors and ammys riding against "professional ammys", this proposal will do nothing to change that. It will still be more lucrative to keep their ammy status and have the freedom to move among divisions.

    I do understand where you are coming from. No longer having access to prize money from the AO division, my daughter works very hard to be able to fund showing her own horse. It was something she carefully considered before accepting a professional position and I'm sure there are times when she second guesses that decision.



  13. #53
    Join Date
    Jul. 19, 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    10,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by supershorty628 View Post
    Sell the saddle. Probably more money than I'd win in a class anyway!

    My parents feel very strongly that there is a line between doing something as a hobby and doing it as a sport. It may be elitist, but that's how they feel about it and that's what I was brought up with. I don't know much about other sports because I've always only been in riding, but I know that juniors and amateurs in figure skating do not win money. Ever.
    Uh, no. Wrong. Completely, for years now. The ISU/USFS abolished the 'no-remuneration' rule a long time ago, because they realized that they would never keep anyone on the amateur side, especially in the western world, if they weren't allowed to earn money. All the Grand Prix events pay prize money to Olympic-eligible skaters, USFS issues 'team envelopes' (stipends to selected skaters of varying levels based on performance and expected performance), and they may skate for a fee in SANCTIONED events. (What will get you suspended is skating in shows that do not have a USFS sanction.) You are permitted to teach skating to a certain level, provided you are not a declared professional, member of the PSA, on a rink staff, etc. Before the prize money was added and shows like Stars On Ice were allowed to pay eligible skaters, the 'stars' stayed in long enough to win whatever was reasonable, then quit the Olympic side and turned pro. To keep skaters longer than a cycle, they realized they had to offer money. It's not a lot, all things considered, but it does some offsetting.

    Heck, even the only part of dancesport that still has a rigid am rule (pro-am student ams are not allowed to earn compensation for dancing, while amateur dancers may teach) they instituted scholarships. The prizes are almost nothing, relatively speaking (in the unlikely event I make top three in my scholarship at Indiana Challenge next month, the most I'll get is $300) but they wanted to acknowledge that the pro-ams are shouldering most of the financial burden for competitions and it probably behooves the organizers to treat them as something other than cash cows.

    It IS high-handed to say that the bottom levels should be funding the top without acknowledging it in some way that's a little more respectful than saying "You owe it to the sport to fund the good people and should be grateful to get a picture frame from HomeGoods for your trouble." Or even a trophy--I know a lot of dancers who'll leave those because how many knick-knacks does one person need? Plus, considering the number of threads about saddle fit, it's a little ironic to suggest giving a saddle as a prize. The odds of flipping it quickly for retail value are slim to none and the odds of it being a perfect fit for horse and rider aren't great, either.



  14. #54
    Join Date
    Nov. 6, 2001
    Location
    Fairfax
    Posts
    1,854

    Default

    With all respect to Mr. Kappler, the prize money diverted from AO's and juniors to professionals won't make an appreciable difference. In the scheme of things, not a huge amount of money. The 5, 10' and 20k classes for jr/AO are few and confined to a handful of shows when you look at the sport nationwide.

    The true issue, and it's hard to solve, is the overall structure of the sport. In Europe, this is a much more popular sport. Events have broad sponsorship which keeps entry fees down. It's a business and a sport with broader appeal. Here, the financial aspects are driven by the hobbyist. Shows are supported by the exhibitor for their own pleasure, there is no other broader interest injecting cash into the process. There is a good reason HITS and the rest cater to the AOs and jrs - they are the bulk of the cash!

    Until our sport generates broader interest and sponsorship, we will continue to have fundamental problems. Changing around who gets the limited prize money does nothing structurally to fix the problem.
    Last edited by jr; Jan. 21, 2013 at 07:17 PM. Reason: Spelling



  15. #55
    Join Date
    Mar. 22, 2005
    Location
    Where it is perpetually winter
    Posts
    5,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by danceronice View Post
    Uh, no. Wrong. Completely, for years now. The ISU/USFS abolished the 'no-remuneration' rule a long time ago, because they realized that they would never keep anyone on the amateur side, especially in the western world, if they weren't allowed to earn money. All the Grand Prix events pay prize money to Olympic-eligible skaters, USFS issues 'team envelopes' (stipends to selected skaters of varying levels based on performance and expected performance), and they may skate for a fee in SANCTIONED events. (What will get you suspended is skating in shows that do not have a USFS sanction.) You are permitted to teach skating to a certain level, provided you are not a declared professional, member of the PSA, on a rink staff, etc. Before the prize money was added and shows like Stars On Ice were allowed to pay eligible skaters, the 'stars' stayed in long enough to win whatever was reasonable, then quit the Olympic side and turned pro. To keep skaters longer than a cycle, they realized they had to offer money. It's not a lot, all things considered, but it does some offsetting.
    I stand corrected... but don't you see the comparison you just made? The Olympic level and Grand Prix events give money. I don't see any mention of the lower levels, unless you just left that out.

    As meupatdoes pointed out, which people seem to be choosing not to focus on... your entry fees go up with prize money. That $1000 class might cost you $65, but a $10k will cost you a cool $400. Realistically, there's a small handful of people who will win money back on a regular basis, but it's just that - a small handful. Unless you're in a small division, say the high jr/a-o with 12 people, or you're one of that small handful, you're probably not getting your money back anyway and then you're out even more than you would have been for a non-money class.

    The lower levels are the ones that have the most entries in them - yes. Are they the ones that give the show the most money? Of course, because usually there's no significant prize money that the show has to pay out. But this attitude of "the upper level riders should be grateful to the lower level riders for 'funding them'" is, honestly, kind of weird. Yes, that money goes to the show, but so do all the fees of the upper level riders (which are astronomical). I can guarantee that my entries in the big jumpers were much more money than they ever were in the hunters or in the low juniors, and there's no guarantee of winning it back.

    The us-against-them mentality is not going to solve anything. I think the idea of capping prize money at different levels is feasible, and I think it's a good idea. It may not be a popular opinion on here, but that's what discussion is for .

    And fordtraktor, if you want a specific example, check out week 6 of the Vermont Summer Festival or some weeks of HITS Saugerties (because there are so many weeks, I can't remember which one has the $$$ class for the children's/adults off the top of my head). The child/adult classic paid, in those cases, $5,000 more or $15,000 more than the high junior/a-o.
    Last edited by supershorty628; Jan. 22, 2013 at 10:32 AM.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Apr. 28, 2008
    Posts
    7,463

    Default

    I looked at the Vermont classes from last year and this is what I see. For six out of six weeks, the Children's Jumpers offered a 1,500 NAL classic and the Adult Jumpers a $2,500 classic. The High Jr/AOs offered a $10,000 Classic each week.

    The final week, the Children's/Adults had a $15,000 end-of-circuit classic and the Open Jumpers had a bigger than usual class ($50k instead of $30k), but the Jr/AOs got their regular $10k classic.

    Overall, the Jr/AOs got the opportunity to win significantly more money throughout the circuit.

    Again, like I said, there is no real concern about entry fees in the division being high because of these "classics" -- at Vermont, you can enter the entire Children's Jumper or Adult Jumper division without entering the Classic -- it's already separate even for Champion/Res points. So if you want to get experience jumping around 3'6 there is still the opportunity to do so for the same entry fee Kappler's plan would foster. You don't have to enter the weekly or the end-of-circuit classic -- and I sure wouldn't if my horse hadn't been winning or at least doing well enough to have a decent possibility at getting a paycheck.



  17. #57
    Join Date
    Mar. 22, 2000
    Posts
    1,171

    Default

    I do not agree with Chris. I am an adult jumper rider who spends her entire non profit salary every year on horses and horse shows. I compete one horse at the bigger shows (about 12 shows this year), in the bigger adult jumper classes (WEF, the 10k classics, Kentucky, indoors, etc.) I win a lot of money back doing by going to the shows that offer the most prize money, but it certainly doesn't even begin to cover my expenses. This year, I won the most prize money I've ever won in my life (won two 10k classics, a few $2,500 classics, etc.), and it covered about 15% of my horse expenses.

    I have no aspirations to become a pro. I would love to move up to the higher divisions, but unfortunately my work hours, my desire to be a hands-on mother, and an available wife inhibit me from doing so. Also, the cost of the horse I would need to compete in the higher levels also inhibits me from moving up. I downright can't afford it, and I don't have the time to put towards training a more inexpensive, green horse.

    I wholeheartedly agree that pros and young jumper divisions should get more prize money and that they should be rewarded for what they do. Although, these pros DO get paid at the end of the day. I pay, as an amateur, through the nose to be a part of this sport that I love.

    But, for Chris to say that the prize money is inhibiting me, as an amateur, from moving up is not true at all. The prize money is keeping me from quitting, to be honest. It's keeping me IN the sport, allowing me to be able to continue showing the way I'd like to and to compete in the shows I love.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  18. #58

    Default

    Here's an example of disproportionate prize money -
    In amateur classes at wef, adult jumpers have a total of 39,000 in prize money in their divisions.
    High amateurs jump for a total of 20000, which is the same as what a horse that does two 1.40 classes and a 1.45 class jumps for, so that's fair but the professional horse pays 610 in entry fees and the amateur 540 (not a big deal I guess but seems odd)
    Low and medium amateurs jump for a total of 26,000 but 1.30 and 1.35 professional horses jump for 13,500
    7 and 8 year olds jump for 9,000

    All these horses pay the same nomination fee


    Another example? The last show I went to in Atlanta had a 10,000 and a 15,000 childrens/adult class in the same week, and a 5000 classic for high jr/amateurs



  19. #59
    Join Date
    Feb. 1, 2001
    Location
    Finally...back in civilization, more or less
    Posts
    11,514

    Default

    Again I think this is a matter of economics. Show managers are going to try to attract the largest group of customers they can, and if throwing prize money at the C/A jumper riders pulls in more entries than the high A/O classes, it is understandable that they will do that. It is not show management's mission, at least as far as I am aware, to try to encourage people to move up to higher divisions.
    **********
    We move pretty fast for some rabid garden snails.
    -PaulaEdwina


    1 members found this post helpful.

  20. #60

    Default

    What a hypocrite!!!

    Kappler trains a well known perennial winner in the adult division. I'm sure she relies on that well deserved prize money to offset his exhorbitant training fees.
    He also brought some clients to Atlanta the past 2 years to compete in classes that awards $25k to the child /adults.
    One of his clients just won 1st and 3rd in a $10k Adult at WEF

    If he feels so strong about changing the system, then why are his clients competing in these classes???



Similar Threads

  1. 2013 EAP Applications Open January 15, 2013
    By PonyPenny in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Jan. 15, 2013, 11:37 AM
  2. Fred Kappler clinic?
    By turningpointequine in forum Dressage
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: May. 22, 2012, 04:38 PM
  3. Chris Kappler clinic...
    By tidy rabbit in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Nov. 9, 2010, 08:35 PM
  4. Chris kappler Clinic
    By twinkle in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Dec. 18, 2009, 11:32 PM
  5. Chris Kappler Clinic?
    By springdaisy in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Nov. 23, 2009, 07:56 AM

Posting Permissions

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