• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.



Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Teague's Forum in this Week's Chronicle

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Teague's Forum in this Week's Chronicle

    Wow. Am I the only one who found this article to be quite whiny? I rarely disagree with Chronicle articles, but a few points really rubbed me the wrong way in Ms. Teague's forum.

    1. Running horse show IS a business. Why should we feel badly for show managers if they need to network to find sponsors for their classes? Isn't that actually good for horse world - "real world" relations?

    2. Yes, in the "good old days," amateurs didn't receive prize money. But it was a completely different world then anyway. Professionals weren't eligible to compete in the Olympics, there was a much smaller show circuit, shows were less expensive in general, etc. Can we really just apply the prize money rules then to the show world today?

    3. The bottom line is that a show doesn't have to offer prize money to exist. If her shows are as excellent as they sound (no sarcasm - the facilities and atmosphere sound top notch) then they will attract exhibitors anyway.

    4. She writes, "Really what's the sense of making a few bucks ($25 to $125) when the show costs you $500 to $1500 per horse?" My question is, if we are really considering such a small amount of money, who cares if an amateur wins it?

    I do not question Ms. Teague's expertise, but as a young (perhaps naive) amateur, I found this article to be full of self-pity more than concrete solutions.

    Other thoughts? Not trying to start a train wreck...

  • #2
    I have not read the article yet but am following the various tales of woe regarding horse shows being too $$$ , jumps being too low and now amateurs being singled out as having different money issues than pros with a great deal of interest. Something is going to have to give or the show circuit as it is now will go down the toilet. Incredible ammount of $. The horse world defies a lot of logical and ethical rules that most other businesses run by. And now discontent ??? Gee whiz.


    • #3
      I also found it a little narcissistic. And as someone who showed in the good ole days, there was often prize money. Not as much as at some shows today, but then my entries didn't run as much either. I guess were all supposed to be money machines. I for one greatly appreciate that classic check defeating hundreds of dollars of entries.


      • #4
        I thought I was going to have to call 911 when I read the title.

        Are you kidding? Prize money is the root of all evil?

        I remember showing in the 1970s in a very remote area of hunter-jumper land. The junior hunter division, the most popular at that time in that area, was four classes: "regular", handy, U/S, and stake.

        The stake was add-back, 50% of the entry fees. Hello, I don't remember the evil at all.

        At the state fair in 1973, my horse had his finest hour, and I won enough money in three classes to pay for the entries, a new pair of Dehner boots, and what was at that time a novelty: a calculator .

        Uh, I do not remember any evil due to the presence of prize money.

        To say that this is so corrupting is absurd. Especially when the author argues that point accumulation is a better reward - YOU ARE KIDDING, RIGHT?

        Any time I've witnessed anything inhumane treatment of show horses, it has been directly related to the point chasing (year end awards) and qualification processes for top shows.

        I must be missing something in the conversation here. If we can't attract the sponsors to the big events, that is a problem, but stopping the $ at lower levels is not the answer to that problem.

        I am so stupified by this op-ed piece that I am seriously considering writing a letter to the editor of the COTH. I've been a reader and subscriber for more than 30 years and have never had this urge.


        • #5
          With money so tight for everyone these days and many owners really making sacrifices in other parts of their life to be able to show, prize money is a big incentive! Nice to know you have a shot at winning back at least some of your expenses. I love trophies, ribbons, and stuff as much as anyone else but sure like a nice check once in a while! I woould like to know how best to attract sponsors though.


          • #6
            Read that last night and knew it was going to cause a stir.

            There were valid points, but the editors really failed on this one. Maybe they're printed as-is. Anyway, it was just way too personal to present a convincing argument, and did borderline on a certain 'woe is me' feel.

            To answer her question as to why qualifying for Indoors is no longer a driving goal, well, with shows running every weekend all year long now, it really has become a matter of who can afford to go to the most horse shows.

            I think this sudden focus on prize money is distracting us from other issues, and I think that is disruptive. I think some of the new purses are ridiculous, and also an effort by show managers to cover up a fatal flaw they don't particularly want us rooting around in (shows are too big, too long, too expensive and the circuit is turning horses over like a puppy mill. No human athlete would try to keep up with such a schedule).

            I don't think add-backs or token jr/am prize money are the root of all evil, but I can also see how one particularly successful manager jacking up prize money to seriously stupendous amounts further strangles the ability of other shows to compete. There is limited sponsorship in our sport, would be nice to see it spread around a bit more.... thoughtfully.
            Last edited by dags; Apr. 10, 2011, 11:15 AM. Reason: spelling
            EHJ | FB | #140 | watch | #insta


            • #7
              Could you please provide a link to Teague's column. I couldn't find it.

              I can't comment on what she said, but I can comment on what I think makes for a great showing experience. I've been going to hunter shows on and off since 1970. And it's not much of a contest on which show has made me feel the most welcome, where I've had the best time, where I can't wait for the next one.

              The Thoroughbred Celebration show that the Virginia Horse Center throws three times a year wins by a mile. And I don't think they even give prize money. They do, however, give lots and lots of prizes. You get a hat for just signing up. Every ribbon winner walks away with something useful. A saddle pad, a gift certificates for grain, a subscription to the new Chron magazine, etc.

              But it's not just the loot. There's always something to eat in the show office: evening meals, morning donuts, a big basket of carrots for the horses (or health nuts).

              But what makes this show the best is how friendly and welcoming everyone is; the show staff, the competitors, the trainers. I've never seen so many smiles at a horse show in 40 years. This is not the atmosphere I've experienced at the big AA shows.

              So prize money is nice, but this show gets what a great boss understands: a raise is important, but just as important are the other ways to show appreciation.


              • #8
                I attended the USHJA conveniton this past December. The ongoing mantra was "level the playing field". Apparently the playing field is to be leveled by squashing flat all the lower levels of competition. After spending thousands of hard-earned dollars competing my horse at the 3' level without so much as a penny in return, my trainer and I have discovered a series of horse shows that pay a little back in the 3 foot division. Guess which shows we choose to attend?
                I read this article with some interest, thinking this person is just not in the 21st century. Yes, we used to get silver trophies as prizes, and a lady in a hat, gloves and high heels would present it to us. Now there are more horses than ever were in the days when horses were used as transportation, just as there are 6 billion people on the planet. The times they are a 'changin', and the horse show managers that change with the times will be successful. What's wrong with earning a few dollars in the 3' division? As for losing one's amateur status, the prize is awarded on the horse's ability, not the rider. On the whole, an interesting take on running a horse show, but hardly relevant.


                • #9
                  There were add-back jumper classes both at local h/j shows and the fair 30 years ago in the midwest.

                  Shows were shorter and more fun. There wasn't an extra fee for showing over 3'6" in the jumpers.

                  I could see how show business costs have risen dramatically since then but maybe if show managers keep complaining and making money on the backs of amateurs, we can migrate to a system more like Europe has. Shows on the weekends, fun, friendly atmosphere.
                  'What's in your trunk?'
                  Free tools for Trainers and Riders


                  • #10
                    I don't know which shows Teague showed in, but the AA shows I competed in, in the '80's had prize $$ in A/O hunters and jumpers. In fact, I figured a show was 'worth it' if the entry fees were 10% of division prize $$. I didn't always win all my entry fees back, but could put a pretty good dent in them. In the mid to late 70's there was always a stake class in each division, too.
                    I get the feeling she has a really selective memory...
                    "I never met a man I didn't like who liked horses." Will Rogers


                    • #11
                      Here We Go Again!

                      I found it interesting (to say the least) to read Teague's Op Ed article in this week's COTH. Interesting, because her article supports the editor's opinion (as well USEF President O'Conner's position) that amateurs shouldn't receive prize money at recognized horse shows. What I found most annoying about Teague's article was her complaining about having to find sponsors to contribute prize money. The first thought that came to my mind was why isn't she charging enough entry fees to cover costs, including prize money? Typically at the large recognized shows in the US, only the "big money" classes such as the Grand Prix and hunter derbies are sponsored. Those classes, with the big money prizes (and sponsors) tend to be the classes with more professional riders. So, how is the problem that Teague is encountering in finding sponsors for her horse show classes going to be solved by eliminating prize money for amateur divisions?

                      As long as amateurs dominate the exhibtors at rated shows, amateurs are generating the revenues to pay for the horse shows, including the prize money. How willing would horse show managers be to reduce the entry fees for amateur divisions in exchange for eliminating prize money? I doubt there would be many horse show managres who would be willing to do so, because the amatuer divisions are the cash cows. Instead of charging the typical $175 per division in entry fees for the adult hunter division and awarding $500 total in prize money (at which 3 entries is break even), would show managers be willing to reduce the entry fees to $75 per division in exchange for awarding no prize money? I think the majority of amatuers would be willing to accept no prize money in exchange for significantly reduced entry fees, however, none of the proponents of eliminating prize money for amatuer divisions has also advocated reducing the entry fees accordingly. Basically, those advocating eliminating prize money for amatuers are, in my opinion, being dishonest in their arguments. Horse show managers know that the amatuer exhibitors are contributing the majority of the horse show revenues; those advocating the elimination of awarding prize money to amateur divisions are advocating the redistribution of horse show prize money to the "elite" higher level professional divisions at the expense of the amatuer exhibitor. As they say in Arkansas "a pig in lipstick is still a pig".


                      • #12
                        When I was a junior in the mid to late 80s a basic goal with my horses was to win back our show costs (all of them, if possible) in the green and junior divisions. I have no idea why this would be considered a bad thing!
                        You can take a line and say it isn't straight- but that won't change its shape. Jets to Brazil


                        • #13
                          yep, back in the 80's you could win back your whole weekend (stalls,entries..etc) if you were champion in a rated division. Now you are lucky to pay for the division if you win every class....
                          "You can't really debate with someone who has a prescient invisible friend"


                          • #14
                            Frankly we are totally motivated by prize money.
                            We attended WEF this year and if not for having to ship so far is cost less than Atlanta .
                            WEF show bill was around $300 after prize money.
                            Atlanta Classic CO was $500 after prize money and we won 4 out of five classes! Could not even win back the class fees if won all five classes.
                            Seriously, we decided not to do the warm up and do the classic, because the warm up was $40 and the classic was $50 and paid $500 in prize money, we won $150 in that class.
                            This was all in the pregreens BTW.
                            If prize money does not INCREASE in the hunters we are going to show alot less!
                            Now I shop around prize lists to see what the costs are and the prize money.
                            Oh, also in Atlanta we brought our baby green his bill was $650 with no options of course to win any money, but that's alot of money for one week to bring along a baby.


                            • #15
                              It seems to me that the big ol' elephant in the room is the HITS franchise and other large, for-profit horse shows.

                              Those guys will, by God, make a profit. That goes unmentioned in these other more superficial discussions about how money is generated and distributed.

                              Do I have this wrong? It seems to me that things were different when large shows-- Devon, Menlo Charity and others were dedicated to raising money for a cause.

                              It seems to me that knowingly or unknowingly the USEF and BNTs who populate committees have gotten in bed with the show managers. While it's not wrong to deny anyone a right to make a buck in principle, the advent of a show industry that wants a lot of money to go to managers does drive up the cost. Trainers who can induce clients to spend at these venues are doing ok. They'll continue to do ok and so will show managers so long as clients keep showing where they are told to. But it was always the client making up the difference. I suspect that trainers who can't get their clients to ship to the big, expensive shows don't have a large voice in this. I don't know where the rest of us, the paying John Q. Public have anything more than an indirect vote which we cast with our feet and wallet.
                              The armchair saddler
                              Politically Pro-Cat


                              • #16
                                I think things did not change so linearly as the above posts would have us believe. It used to be the horse shows were almost all charity events. They were put on by the Shriners and the Sertoma Club and used volunteers. The concession stand was a Shriner with his grill and a cooler and no health inspection in sight.

                                The rings were dirt, or were roped off fields. There was no dragging, no footing, no watering of the rings. There was no professional horse show manager or technical coordinator, no professional jump crew, no professional announcers, no course designers. We didn't jump jumps made out of flower boxes and panels and fancy standards. We jumped jumps with poles made out of saplings and straw bales and plain wing standards.

                                Things gradually got more and more technical because when you went to a show with the good footing and the fast jump crew and smart announcers, you could tell the difference. Instead of doing the work themselves, charities began hiring the managers to do it, who in turn hired the people to fill in the gaps. Let's face it. when was the last time you waited for the jump crew to finish in one ring before coming to the other? Naturally, all these people working would like to get paid.

                                The show manager has no intention of working for free, nor should he. They do, however, want to cut costs and maximize profits, like any good business. That comes out of the wallets of the exhibitors. I would think horse show profits are pretty good, considering you can see a manager put on a horse show year after year at the same location on the same date and draw maybe 100 horses.

                                None of this was too much of an issue when the economy was good. Now, however, every little bit matters so the costs of showing and where the money goes is now put under a microscope.
                                You will not rise to the occasion, you will default to your level of training.


                                • #17
                                  Begrudging the amateurs a paltry amount of payback in prize money is certainly biting the hand that feeds you, show managers. Nobody denies the fact that professionally managed and well run shows deserve to make money, but we all know that funding horse showing rides largely on the back of the adult amateur and children's hunter divisions (or their "modified" counterparts at 2'6"). To deny those cash cow divisions at least the fantasy of being considered worthy of a check at the end of the weekend is a poor marketing strategy at best.
                                  "Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?" Sun Tzu

                                  My Blog!


                                  • #18
                                    I did find the POV a little odd. Running shows are her BUSINESS. If business is tough, well, that's a shame (especially because it sounds like the facility ROCKS) but perhaps this business model doesn't make sense for her. Perhaps she'd be happier running schooling/non-USEF shows and not being constrained by those rules? I dunno... I had a little trouble understanding the POV of the writer, no one's FORCING her to hold rated shows.
                                    "The Son Dee Times" "Sustained" "Somerset" "Franklin Square"


                                    • #19
                                      The article did come across as "O woe is me" and I am probably going to get beat down for this, but if you are showing on the basis of hopefully winning back all/part of your entry fees are you really showing because you enjoy the sport? Or are you just putting the mileage on a horse to hopefully sell in the future? Yes the prize money is nice, but I enjoy looking at that ribbon and remembering how I kicked butt that day on my grade horse.


                                      • #20
                                        Originally posted by ammydreams View Post
                                        Wow. Am I the only one who found this article to be quite whiny? I rarely disagree with Chronicle articles, but a few points really rubbed me the wrong way in Ms. Teague's forum.

                                        1. Running horse show IS a business. Why should we feel badly for show managers if they need to network to find sponsors for their classes? Isn't that actually good for horse world - "real world" relations?

                                        2. Yes, in the "good old days," amateurs didn't receive prize money. But it was a completely different world then anyway. Professionals weren't eligible to compete in the Olympics, there was a much smaller show circuit, shows were less expensive in general, etc. Can we really just apply the prize money rules then to the show world today?

                                        The author's statements regarding the availability of prize money in the late 80s is factually incorrect. I had horses competing on the A circuit during the same time frame in the green conformation hunters (like Teague) as well as the Regular Conformation and Junior Hunter divisions and the prize money was very significant (top placings in a division would bring several thousand dollars). The entry fees were also very significant for these shows, which helped fund the prize money. The reason amateurs could accept prize money is that the awards are deemed attributable to the horse's performance, not that of the rider.
                                        Roseknoll Sporthorses