3'3 Maclay Finals

[anon510129]

@Madison

Totally agree. Last year’s finals showed that a lot of riders were not prepared, so a stepping stone class could be useful, but don’t call it the Maclay, and I’m not sure why you would call it a “finals” prior to riders having to qualify for it.

I agree that last years finals showed how little prepared some riders were. I think that is a problem in our sport, though, is that people with money can get a nice horse and go to all the shows, qualify for a big final and go in and be terrible. It happens time and time again. I see swinging legs, bouncy hands, etc. If you’re not prepared to show at that height, you need to step down until you can win. There are the THIS medal finals and other opportunities to do 3’ medals that are already offered.

I’ve been less than thrilled with all the adding of divisions at the 3" increments. The Children’s Pony Hunters, the Pre-Children’s, the 3’3" Junior Hunters, etc. etc.

I think if you’re not prepared to show in the division, you need to practice at home until you’re ready to come to a show. But I get that it’s about money and getting more people to the shows. I just think it’s not very progressive for our sport. JMHO.

[Pennywell_Bay]

@anon510129

I agree that last years finals showed how little prepared some riders were. I think that is a problem in our sport, though, is that people with money can get a nice horse and go to all the shows, qualify for a big final and go in and be terrible. It happens time and time again. I see swinging legs, bouncy hands, etc. If you’re not prepared to show at that height, you need to step down until you can win. There are the THIS medal finals and other opportunities to do 3’ medals that are already offered.

I’ve been less than thrilled with all the adding of divisions at the 3" increments. The Children’s Pony Hunters, the Pre-Children’s, the 3’3" Junior Hunters, etc. etc.

I think if you’re not prepared to show in the division, you need to practice at home until you’re ready to come to a show. But I get that it’s about money and getting more people to the shows. I just think it’s not very progressive for our sport. JMHO.

Bolding mine. Not everyone is going to win. Step down until they can perform at 3’6 proficiently. Winning is extra.

[anon510129]

@Pennywell Bay

Bolding mine. Not everyone is going to win. Step down until they can perform at 3’6 proficiently. Winning is extra.

Agreed. That is a better way of putting it.

[Limerick]

@IPEsq

Yes, sorry I wasn’t clear. Modifieds still exist some places but I never understood why it had to be replaced with a rated 3’3 jr/ao. Is it really that hard to go from 3’ to 3’6 anymore?

Ask a horse how much fun it is to have to jump a 3’6 jump from a chip. Or if he enjoys swimming through a 3’6 in and out.

[IPEsq]

@Limerick

Ask a horse how much fun it is to have to jump a 3’6 jump from a chip. Or if he enjoys swimming through a 3’6 in and out.

Then the rider is not ready. Practice more and show at a height that is appropriate. Why must it always be about showing? Sounds like the rider would not be ready for 3’3 either with any kind of reasonable questions that might be asked at an equitation “final.”

And just because there are enough people on this BB who talk the talk without walking the walk, to add background to my opinion, I won my first Maclay qualifier class at 12 years old on an OTTB with a stop in him, and it was my first time around at 3’6" at a show, but I’d been practicing at home for a while and jumping 3’ for a couple of years already starting with my pony. I have qualified for and shown at Maclay, USEF (then, AHSA), and USET finals. I never really had a good “finals horse” for the big classes and was not really a contender, but I have won a state level 3’6" final. I also made the jump up to the 4’ hunters as a young rider. That actually prepared me and my horse better for the USET classes, because it made the harder questions at 3’9" feel easier.

[Limerick]

It is about showing because that is where trainers make money. They don’t make money on boarding. I am not saying I love this fact but it is the new reality.

And I was responding to your question about is it that hard to go from 3 foot to 3’6 and I am saying that yes, it is. It sounds like you are an accomplished rider so I am sure you appreciate the approach of increasing the challenge by smaller increments so that riders and horses should be set up for success. There is nothing wrong with doing 3, 3’3, and perhaps finally doing the 3’6.

[AffirmedHope]

There is also a pretty big jump in price between a competitive 3’-3’3 horse and 3’6 horse.

[IPEsq]

My opinion is that you don’t need entire rated divisions at 3’3. It just puts all the focus on showing and not learning how to ride. When I had a green horse as a junior, I stepped back down to the 3’ to develop the horse because I hardly had the steering or brakes to do even that height at first. He was regularly jumping 3’6 in schooling before we ever entered the show ring at that height during which time he continued to get show miles at 3’. I don’t think at that stage it would have been any fun for us to chip at 3’3 either. Whether it’s for rider or horse development, rated 3’3 hunters and eq is not necessary. If you really, really need a stepping stone, I think that’s what the unrated modified division was for. You don’t need to pretend you did well at “the Maclay finals” or say you “qualified for junior hunter finals” because you didn’t–acknowledge that you and/or your horse need a practice division. I guess I don’t like the culture of everyone deserves a medal. No, not everyone does. Not winning isn’t as fun, but maybe it makes those with determination work harder to get better. I think it’s all a money grab that doesn’t do anything to benefit the sport or develop riders.

[Limerick]

Glad you aren’t a show manager-I like the fact there are recognized 3’3 divisions. It is a great division for our OTTB. Junior Hunter finals is a great goal for a kid that brought him along from 2’6 and is aging out. He hasn’t had to be rushed and kid has learned to ride. The hunters have changed even since the days of Strapless and the soft canter that is rewarded makes accuracy even more important.

[AllOverFarm]

I randomly picked WEF & Hits weeks 5 & 10 to look at the numbers for each division.
WEF 5. HITS 5
large Jr 34. Large Jr 26
small Jr 21. Small Jr 10
3’3 Jr 38. 3’3 Jr 26
chiildrens 57. Children’s 48

WEF 10. HITS 10
large Jr 24. Large Jr 6
small Jr 17. Small Jr 8
3’3 Jr 32. 3’3 Jr 18
childrens 49. Childrens 31

I didn’t separate the large and small junior hunters or the children’s hunters by age .
so in actuality Because of the age split in those divisions, the 3’3 Jr hunters was the bigger class size for both shows.
( the 3’3 Jr hunters did not have an age split )

[findeight]

@AffirmedHope

There is also a pretty big jump in price between a competitive 3’-3’3 horse and 3’6 horse.

Yeah, it usually adds a zero.

[greysfordays]

I fundamentally don’t see anything wrong with a gradual approach to moving up the levels. We are all taught that good horsemen take the time and move gradually.

More importantly, I just don’t really understand the downside? I get that some view it as a bastardization of the sport. But truly, I think greater participation is the most important goal for the sport to be healthy and grow. And I think the 3’3 division encourages participation. If a 3’3 division gives someone who started in the AAs something to aspire to, then who exactly is hurt? For folks who want the experience of doing a handy round and jogging, and slightly longer lines, but who just cannot afford the giant financial step up in horse price. That division, by the way, is ENORMOUS. I wouldn’t put it in the same category of everyone gets a medal, you really have to win that one.

Calling a 3’3 medal final you don’t have to qualify for, the Maclay, now THAT, I think is damaging bc it takes away from the prestige of this extremely challenging and historic medal. So I do that issue with that. Call it something else, qualify on points and I think we could all agree it would have it’s place.

[ww3467]

“Maclay” is being removed from the title of the class: http://myemail.constantcontact.com/T…id=-wIpnCZTAAo

“The goal of the National Horse Show 3’3” Equitation Championship is to offer a stepping stone to riders who aspire to compete in the ASPCA Maclay National Championships," said Geoff Teall, Chairman of the Equitation Committee for the National Horse Show. “We were pleased with the impassioned response towards the addition of this class from the equestrian community and we have taken into consideration the many comments that were received and have since removed the ‘Maclay’ designation from the title of the class. We are certain that the addition of this class will allow more riders an opportunity to compete and prepare for the major ASPCA Maclay National Championship.”

[findeight]

@ww3467

“Maclay” is being removed from the title of the class: http://myemail.constantcontact.com/T…id=-wIpnCZTAAo

“The goal of the National Horse Show 3’3” Equitation Championship is to offer a stepping stone to riders who aspire to compete in the ASPCA Maclay National Championships," said Geoff Teall, Chairman of the Equitation Committee for the National Horse Show. “We were pleased with the impassioned response towards the addition of this class from the equestrian community and we have taken into consideration the many comments that were received and have since removed the ‘Maclay’ designation from the title of the class. We are certain that the addition of this class will allow more riders an opportunity to compete and prepare for the major ASPCA Maclay National Championship.”

Good for them. See, somebody does listen and reads COTH.

[dags]

@findeight

Good for them. See, somebody does listen and reads COTH.

Actually, Jennie Carlton deserves a medal for allowing a rather fiery discussion, containing several notably unhappy BNTs, to persist on her FB timeline for days. Must have been maddening to keep up with.

(I mean, I give COTH credit where it’s due, but there is no doubt the decision makers in this were getting straight called-out on FB. )

[danceronice]

@Limerick

It is about showing because that is where trainers make money. They don’t make money on boarding. I am not saying I love this fact but it is the new reality.

Also, if you’re a parent, why would you spent $1500+ a month on board, God knows what on lessons, thousands on tack, buy a horse who’s possibly in the low/mid five figures, the vet, the farrier, etc…and then have the kid creep along at home because it’s not about showing? There are much, much cheaper ways to ride if you aren’t going to show than a serious training barn.

[HorseLuvr]

Dumbing it down 3" at a time…