The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 31
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov. 28, 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    95

    Default Are you kidden ME!!! RE - Examine show jumpings prize money.

    This weeks Chronicles article by Chris Kapler. This Thread could get long and dirty with just my opinion alone on the article.

    " It's the duty of the federation to create a sport that encourages people to get better. It should be that the higher they jump, the more money they may win" BS!

    I ride every day to improve my skills so I should be ready for the higher level. the Federation then can go buy my $100,000.00 horse to go and jump in a $25,000 Grand Prix. No, I'll just take a second mortgage out on the house to try and pay for my Grand Prix horse.

    I wouldn't compete in Dressage, there is no Prize Money
    when I can enter in Jumper classes at Horse Shows that offer $15,000 prize money. (which the winner usually only gets $4,000). It cost Mucho Money to keep these horses healthy. Every win helps and supports my Horse Show traveling account so I can plan my next show.

    Does Chris not get it, most Amateurs have full time jobs or in school. This is not going to be their career. I have many students who goals is to make it to the High Child/Adult so they can try for the money classes. This is probable as far as they will go. Due to time and money and cost of new horse. To win in a big money class at 1.15 against 64 horses is all I need. 1.15 to 1.20 is as high as I want to go.
    And you get in the higher levels you have pay Nomination Fees.


    If they change this rule I just as well go into Reining or Barrel racing. These riding discipline offer large Prize money to Amateurs.
    Last edited by Moderator 1; Jan. 24, 2013 at 12:12 PM. Reason: language in title
    "An ordinary trainer cannot hear a Horse speak, a Good trainer can, a Great trainer can hear them whisper and a Top Trainer can HEAR them Think." John O'Leary


    1 members found this post helpful.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct. 10, 2001
    Location
    West Coast of Canada
    Posts
    1,641

    Default

    There is already a nice big discussion about this going on

    http://www.chronofhorse.com/forum/fo...-Hunter-Jumper


    1 members found this post helpful.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec. 10, 2012
    Posts
    689

    Default

    **** out of ***** on the rant-o-meter


    1 members found this post helpful.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun. 16, 2010
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by caballero View Post
    **** out of ***** on the rant-o-meter
    Good grief, what does it take to get five stars? Coherence?


    10 members found this post helpful.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec. 10, 2012
    Posts
    689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catherine Cullen View Post
    Good grief, what does it take to get five stars? Coherence?
    It was just that little bit short in the krazeeness.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar. 6, 2003
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    2,979

    Default

    Needs more CAPSLOCK AND !!!!!!!!


    7 members found this post helpful.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul. 22, 2012
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    804

    Default

    You seem to have missed the argument that lowering prize money would hopefully lead to more affordable shows in general. Whether that is true or not is debatable, but I don't have a horse in this race.

    But seriously. Damn.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2009
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,656

    Default

    So are you a pro or amateur? First you say that they need to offer the money to the amateurs then you say you have students showing, and then it is back to switching to something else since it offers money to amateurs



  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep. 24, 2001
    Location
    on the road.....again
    Posts
    1,820

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by big_red_ottb View Post
    You seem to have missed the argument that lowering prize money would hopefully lead to more affordable shows in general. Whether that is true or not is debatable, but I don't have a horse in this race.

    But seriously. Damn.
    Unfortunately, lowing prize money does not change the cost of the show grounds, jumps, officials etc. Most entry fees are determined by those fixed costs and altered slightly based on prize money. There are already caps in place for many entry fee based on the prize money in the 25+ gp.

    You might see a small break in entry fees by lowering prize money in some classics, but I don't believe it would be that significant, unless you did away with the classic concept in the jumpers and had no money in any jumper classes, except X.

    The majority of the shows put there prize money in the classes that have exhibitors. The more that want the show, the more money offered. Having to put money in classes where few participate only drives up the cost for the others.

    Look at the Hunters, shows are required to offer the money prize money of any division in the high performance hunters. When was the last time that was the largest division at a show (even when only looking at the A rated divisions). Management can add prize money to the adults, but it doesn't count against the money they are required to offer in the A rated sections. I have never understood this. Managers need the flexibility to offer prize money based on the exhibitors that attend their shows. I actually think if there were a few less restrictions on that, you would see prices drop more as they would not need to inflate the lower level fees to cover the big classes with few entries.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Feeltheride View Post
    I wouldn't compete in Dressage, there is no Prize Money
    when I can enter in Jumper classes at Horse Shows that offer $15,000 prize money.
    You should probably compare the relative expense of a dressage show to a h/j show before you get too excited.

    Lauren Sprieser wrote a blog article about it costing her (GASP) $250 per class to enter a horse in a CDI at the Grand Prix level and the horseshow lasting "three days." Stabling was reported to be "in the $250 range."
    So, I mean, "just for starters, you're in the $700 range."

    Please note that the $700 figure INCLUDED your horse's FEI passport ($175 every four years) and your FEI registrations ($15 each for horse and rider every year). Additionally, you can't enter JUST the one Grand Prix class, you also have to enter the Grand Prix Special or the GP Kur, so her math includes TWO trips around the international GP ring.

    Yeah, ok.
    In dressage that is what you spend when you take your Grand Prix horse to a CDI and try to rack up international points and whoops you need to re-up all your memberships too.

    In h/j that is what you spend to put baby green miles on a 4yo or attempt to make it around the 2'6" mortifieds, and this is assuming you already re-upped all your memberships at an earlier show.

    Please name me ONE grand prix class for a show jumper that you can participate in including entry, stabling, and all required horse and rider memberships for $700.

    I keep trying to introduce the mathematical concept that "less prize money = less expense for everyone all around" but people don't seem to be wearing their math hats these days. I guess dressage riders have to count 15 ones, h/j people maybe jump in and then count up to 7.


    6 members found this post helpful.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb. 18, 2001
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    6,822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meupatdoes View Post
    I keep trying to introduce the mathematical concept that "less prize money = less expense for everyone all around" but people don't seem to be wearing their math hats these days. I guess dressage riders have to count 15 ones, h/j people maybe jump in and then count up to 7.
    Everyone understands that in theory. But there's no proof that the show managers go along with that idea. If they did, I'd be on board, but in the meantime, I want what little money I can get.



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tha Ridge View Post
    Everyone understands that in theory. But there's no proof that the show managers go along with that idea. If they did, I'd be on board, but in the meantime, I want what little money I can get.
    Well, the way to turn the ship in the right direction isn't to say, 'Let's just keep doing what we're doing and keep the prize money really high!", but rather to say, "Let's lower the prize money, and maybe also some of the other costs inflicted on A-shows such as jumbo trons and viewing galleries and a five day schedule and whatever else nonsense they are now required to have for an A-rating just so that no little guy could ever compete with Struzzeri and the like, and if we really want to get started eliminate the mileage rule, and then show managers will have demonstrably lower costs plus more competition and they can see how keeping the entries astronomical works out for them."

    Aka a math-based solution.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul. 24, 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    5,352

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meupatdoes View Post
    Please name me ONE grand prix class for a show jumper that you can participate in including entry, stabling, and all required horse and rider memberships for $700.

    I keep trying to introduce the mathematical concept that "less prize money = less expense for everyone all around" but people don't seem to be wearing their math hats these days. I guess dressage riders have to count 15 ones, h/j people maybe jump in and then count up to 7.
    Point one - I'll agree there. To ride in the GP at any major show, you have to show in at least one class prior. So if you ONLY showed in those two classes at a typical big A/AA show you're looking at this:
    Fees: FEI Passport $300 (every 4 years)
    FEI Reg $15 horse, $15 rider
    Horseshow: Typical stall/GP Nom fee/feed = $710
    Classes (entry fees): Welcome Class: $300
    Grand Prix: $425
    Total fees (excluding extras like hauling, hotels, etc and I also didn't include USEF membership, which presumably a dressage rider also has to pay)=

    $1765 for 2 classes at a show.

    My comment about the prize money, though, comes directly from a couple of show managers that I know well. They've said to me on many occasions that the prize money typically comes directly from the sponsors. And the sponsors generally aren't interested in donating money without a class and championship to tie it to.

    Now this could just be in the microcosm of the Seattle area H/J circuit. But my translation of that is that there wouldn't be sponsors without the direct contribution to classes/divisions and so if you lower the prize money you're not kicking dollars back into the show, but instead not partaking from the sponsor donations.

    I know there are several people who run shows on COTH, so hopefully someone will chime in and correct me if I'm wrong.

    But I will also take a possibly not-very-popular stance and say that I absolutely agree with Chris Kapler that the prize money should get bigger the bigger the classes get. If we want to drive a horse world here that creates the best of the best we'll keep incentivizing people to reach for the top classes, not settle at 1.10m because that's where the big prize money is. Why is it the federation's job to support the economics of the mediocre levels of the sport? And please note, I'm not calling 1.10m riders mediocre, just that someone who gets to that point and decides to stay there is settling in the lower levels. What's the point of driving a horseshow ecosystem to support that?

    But meupatdoes, point taken. The only way to ensure that the problem continues is to keep doing more of the same.
    __________________________________
    Forever exiled in the NW.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb. 18, 2001
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    6,822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PNWjumper View Post
    And please note, I'm not calling 1.10m riders mediocre, just that someone who gets to that point and decides to stay there is settling in the lower levels. What's the point of driving a horseshow ecosystem to support that?
    You know, a lot of people get there and stay there because it's what they can afford. Until there's a charity that hands out 1.40m+ horses, I don't foresee that changing. Not everyone is settling.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov. 26, 2011
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tha Ridge View Post
    You know, a lot of people get there and stay there because it's what they can afford. Until there's a charity that hands out 1.40m+ horses, I don't foresee that changing. Not everyone is settling.
    And on top of the obvious 1.4m horse price issue, trainers who are truly qualified to help someone move up beyond 1.1m are generally expensive. Many talented riders are priced out of ever getting the opportunity to safely move up the levels.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jul. 24, 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    5,352

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tha Ridge View Post
    You know, a lot of people get there and stay there because it's what they can afford. Until there's a charity that hands out 1.40m+ horses, I don't foresee that changing. Not everyone is settling.
    I'm not sure what charity you're looking for. My last 3 1.40m horses have cost less than $4,000 each (with two of them being below $2,000). I put a lot of "sweat equity" into them, but my point is that you don't *have* to spend big bucks to get an upper level athlete. You just need to have an eye or a trainer with an eye to find a good prospect.
    __________________________________
    Forever exiled in the NW.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb. 18, 2001
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    6,822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PNWjumper View Post
    I'm not sure what charity you're looking for. My last 3 1.40m horses have cost less than $4,000 each (with two of them being below $2,000). I put a lot of "sweat equity" into them, but my point is that you don't *have* to spend big bucks to get an upper level athlete. You just need to have an eye or a trainer with an eye to find a good prospect.
    You got lucky and you obviously have a lot of time. For amateurs without luck and time (riding 3x per week is a lot for me), the only option is buy a horse that can put up with jokes. Those aren't cheap.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PNWjumper View Post
    I'm not sure what charity you're looking for. My last 3 1.40m horses have cost less than $4,000 each (with two of them being below $2,000). I put a lot of "sweat equity" into them, but my point is that you don't *have* to spend big bucks to get an upper level athlete. You just need to have an eye or a trainer with an eye to find a good prospect.
    I respect you and what you do but your response really reflects the whole pro rider mentality. As much as they don't have money, many amateurs don't have sufficient time to put in to making good, top quality horses.

    How much would you charge a client who bought a $4,000 horse with GP potential over the life it would take the horse to get there if say they could only ride 3 days a week? Add that up.

    My last upper level horse cost me $8,500 and as an amateur I spent $250,000 over his life to get him there (lessons, trailering, board, vets, farriers, equipment, show expenses outside of entries and stall, etc.).


    5 members found this post helpful.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    I respect you and what you do but your response really reflects the whole pro rider mentality. As much as they don't have money, many amateurs don't have sufficient time to put in to making good, top quality horses.

    How much would you charge a client who bought a $4,000 horse with GP potential over the life it would take the horse to get there if say they could only ride 3 days a week? Add that up.

    My last upper level horse cost me $8,500 and as an amateur I spent $250,000 over his life to get him there (lessons, trailering, board, vets, farriers, equipment, show expenses outside of entries and stall, etc.).
    I completely agree with you - show jumping is an expensive sport no matter what the entry point . and horses that cost less to buy don't cost less to keep. but I have to point out that horse boarding and training is a profession with terrible margins and while what you paid your professional to board and train him is enormous, its likely that your pro didn't make a lot of money from it - kind of off topic but the idea that horses cost a lot because horse professionals are ripping amateurs off seems to somehow enter into the debate as a reason that amateurs ought to have their prize money protected. ( I'm not saying that there aren't bad horse pros, just like there are bad doctors and bad lawyers and etc - just that the good ones still have to charge a lot just to break even)

    And another thought- if we adjusted prize money down in amateur classes and took away the incentive for "shamateurs" to chase money in these classes, couldn't we consider getting rid of the whole "amateur owner" rule in the jumper divisions - make them all just "amateur" classes - starting at 1.00, then 1.10, 1.20, 1.30, 1.40 all with the same set of rules and all cross-enter able, with increasing prize money as you move up- none at 1.00, $1000 at 1.10, $2000 at 1.20, $2500 at 1.30 and $5000 at 1.40 . As the rules stand now, the adult jumper to low amateur owner jump is insurmountable for someone who can't afford to buy or own a horse. Why should adult jumper riders get to lease or borrow horses and show for lots of prize money, but low amateur owner riders have to buy their own horses and often compete for less. and why can low amateur riders cross enter into high classes but adult riders can't cross enter into low amateur classes. It seems like this change would do much more to ease the affordability of moving up the levels for many more people than promoting prize money in amateur classes as a way to offset the expenses of owning a horse.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jul. 24, 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    5,352

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    I respect you and what you do but your response really reflects the whole pro rider mentality. As much as they don't have money, many amateurs don't have sufficient time to put in to making good, top quality horses.

    How much would you charge a client who bought a $4,000 horse with GP potential over the life it would take the horse to get there if say they could only ride 3 days a week? Add that up.

    My last upper level horse cost me $8,500 and as an amateur I spent $250,000 over his life to get him there (lessons, trailering, board, vets, farriers, equipment, show expenses outside of entries and stall, etc.).
    Well, for starters, I'm not a pro. I am an amateur. And to Tha Ridge's point, I have no more time on my hands than anyone else. I'm the VP of a Biotech start-up and put in 60+ hours a week in addition to having 2 small children. I'm intimately familiar with the doing-conference-calls-on-horseback, riding in the pitch black, and working full days while at horseshows routines. It's a matter of how much you want to sacrifice, and as my husband says, I may have a "boundary issue" with the horses.

    It is a fair point that many (if not most?) amateurs don't have time AND money. But that wasn't why I posted. I posted as a response to Tha Ridge who implied that the only thing that kept her out of the 1.40m jumpers was the cost of the horse. If you're showing at 1.10m, you're already paying for the cost of the show, the cost of the training rides, and the cost of the lessons. It will cost you that same $250K (or whatever you want to call that number) to pay for training rides, horseshows, clinics, lessons, vet, and farrier on a horse you keep at the same level as a prospect you're bringing up through the levels.

    If you're capable of riding a 1.40m jumper course you *should* be good enough to bring along your own horse (and if the only thing that's keep you out of the 1.40m is the cost of the horse that's the implication)...with or without help is a moot point because you pay for that help either way. The alternative is finding a horse who can take a joke. Well, those are out there and they're not *that* hard to find in the younger age ranges if you have a good eye or good help (I'm in the latter camp and am very lucky to have a great trainer and a great vet I rely heavily on to give the once over to my choices). The bigger problem, in my opinion, is that very few trainers these days (on the h/j circuit) know how to spot a good prospect and the how to develop it into an upper level jumper. But that's a whole other topic.

    So if you can't get there because you don't want to take the time and energy to get there, or can't find a trainer who's willing to help you in that goal, then call it what it is. Don't hide behind the "I can't afffffoooorrrrdddd the perfect hoooorrrssee!!!" excuse. I firmly believe that just about anyone who wants to can get to the upper levels (given the right slightly obsessive mindset) and the only thing that prevents most amateurs from wanting to do it is that pesky sense of mortality and the preponderance of less-than-stellar trainers who are happy to keep their adults jumping over the little jumps.

    So if you get to the 1.10m and decide to sit there that's your choice driven by your circumstances. There's certainly nothing wrong with it if it makes you happy. If you're only willing to make time 3 days a week to ride then that's your choice. I have no problem with all of that, but why should a show strive to get more money increasingly to the people who are unwilling or unable to make the horses and the sport a top priority?
    __________________________________
    Forever exiled in the NW.


    10 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Show Jumpings wake up call..my thoughts exactly!!
    By Kenjackson in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: Dec. 28, 2011, 02:53 PM
  2. Prize Money When Leasing?
    By PonyPuzzle in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Dec. 19, 2011, 07:41 PM
  3. Prize money etiquette?
    By HunterJumperDoc in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: Oct. 6, 2011, 04:02 AM
  4. prize money
    By skyy in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: Nov. 20, 2010, 09:06 AM
  5. Prize money - why some events and not others?
    By twofatponies in forum Off Course
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Dec. 8, 2009, 04:59 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
  •