My experience was the same as Lauriep’s. We most certainly DID NOT get to school at recognized shows. If if was indoors, like at Dorton Arena, we got to hack for 30 mins at night. Otherwise, you didn’t get to go in the ring at all. And I don’t remember the fences all being verticals either. Although they certainly didn’t have an entire florist shop at every jump either, the way they do now. :lol:
And I was priveleged to watch Kenny, Charlie, Rodney, Patty, Betty, Joanie and the rest. My #1 goal was to be able ride like Patty. :yes:
I remember warming up for the juniors using the hunt team class on Friday night. The working hunter who had already been showing during the week would lead and 2 junior hunters would follow around the course which was set at 3’6".
Perhaps people who were not members of a recognized hunt used other classes to school, but back then, MANY people who showed were also member of a hunt (even if they never hunted their show horses) and so could school over 3’6" with a lead over every fence.
Janet and I are from roughly the same era and we both rode with VHV (indeed, we lived about a mile from each other down Guard Hill Road in Bedford :D), so our experiences were very similar. The fact that we had similar experiences with different memories just goes to show how the passage of 35 - 40 years can allow different vignettes to stick in our brains.
The discussion of “better” or “worse” is an apples/oranges argument. The horses of each era were/are BOTH better and worse at what they were bred/trained to do v. what they were not bred/trained to do.
The horses of the 60’s were hunters who specialized in showing. The horses of the 70’s were transitional horses. By the 80’s, show horses were specialists and were no longer remotely similar to their field hunter predecessors.
The evolution of the cocker spaniel is a good analogy. When the breed was first developed, there was one dog. Then breeders began selectively breeding the cocker for different purposes until now there are the Field Cocker, The English Cocker, and The American Cocker. If you will, the Field Cocker is analogous to the Field Hunter. The English Cocker is analogous to the TB, and the American Cocker is = to the WB.
Obviously this is not a perfect comparison and I am not saying it is – so please do not nitpick --. My point is that you can no longer compare The American Cocker to the Field Cocker, which is why the AKC has recognized them as 2 separate breeds.
Just as you cannot compare the horses of the 60’s to the horses of today. They were bred and trained for different jobs. Either would not excel at the other one’s job. Neither horse is better or worse – they are different animals. Dave Kelly regularly took his conformation hunters fox hunting. Did that make them “better” show horses? It sure made them different.
Bingo, Pam, you are right on. I love the analogy about the cocker spaniel, and the same can be said of other breeds of dog who are bred for very different jobs.
As an aside, I had the opportunity through my job to study the Canine Genome Project. Part of the project involved collecting DNA from different breeds to see if specific breeds carried specific markers. They do, but there was one very interesting aberration: one field trial Beagle did not fit wholely into the DNA pattern for “beagle.” That’s because the pattern was established by collecting data from show Beagles. The field trial Beagle was, in fact, a different dog.
I’m not implying that the hunter of yesteryear has different DNA from today’s (although I suspect it would, simply because of the influx of warmblood stock and the outflux of TB stock). But the correllation is there–they are simply two different animals.
In the interests of full disclosure, I need to say that I never rode with VHV, though I knew several people who did. (And never rode at the Garden). Our common riding experience was GBHPC.
I’ll be up on Guard Hill Rd this weekend- “your” old house is still there, but the old Whip and Spur (Penwood) show grounds are now (4 acre) McMansions.
[QUOTE=lauriep;2526165]
No, they didn’t. You could not school in the ring, under any circumstances, at an A show.
.[/QUOTE]
Respectfully, I have to say that this just is not true. There were many, many A shows where you could school in the ring throughout Va. and NC. And I sat on the side of the rail watching professionals school in the MAIN RING at Devon in the '70s - and I don’t mean just hacking.
[QUOTE=Offset;2527041]
Respectfully, I have to say that this just is not true. There were many, many A shows where you could school in the ring throughout Va. and NC. And I sat on the side of the rail watching professionals school in the MAIN RING at Devon in the '70s - and I don’t mean just hacking.[/QUOTE] We schooled in the ring early in the mornings and sometimes warmed up in the barn isles. Sometimes there was no other ring. Then again, I rode in the 50’s and early 60’s. I have no 70’s horseshow experience.
I also recall this being my experience. I have a picture of me from the early to mid 70’s in the junior hunters jumping an oxer- not sure what show it is from, maybe Quentin?. Unfortunately, I don’t have a scanner or I would post it - rust britches and all :eek:
I agree with the posters that have said that the horses and riders of the 70’s are different, not better or worse than those today.
I agree with the posters that have said that the horses and riders of the 70’s are different, not better or worse than those today.[/QUOTE]
I love watching both hunter and jumper rings these days. But they are each very specialized. Read a Chronicle from the 70s and you would see many of the names LaurieP mentioned dominating both the hunter and jumper rings at a single show. (I have to confess I get a chuckle over the “novelty” exhibition hunter classes held at the Las Vegas jumper show. People seem so amused that European (jumper) riders can find their way around a hunter course.)
It’s certainly different now. In fact, a few years ago, my town hosted two shows in one weekend: a hunter show with a big$$ classic that attracted many of the top pros in that discipline and a jumper classic featuring many of the big jumper names. The only people I remember seeing at both shows were some frenzied spectators driving the 30 miles between the venues. I wonder if, 20 years from now, separate shows for hunters and jumpers will be the norm?
In fact, as I type this, I’m looking at a link to the Wachovia Show Jumping Classic at Beacon Hill…don’t see any hunter classes on that schedule.
A question - is there any reason to believe that a modern, top-notch hunter would be unable to complete an “old-school” course? Say, rustic 4’ fences, on an outside course with some terrain variations, at a nice hand gallop?
I guess what I’m asking is whether the modern TB or WB would be incapable of doing that or is it just that we’re training them for something so different?
Considering that there are plenty of moden TBs and WBs EVENTING at that height, and that more that a few have made the transition (both ways) between eventing and hunters, they should be plenty capable, as long as they were trained for it.
A truly top notch horse nowadays, with the right rider in the tack, could probably do the old style course, or even foxhunt (not that anyone is taking Popeye K hunting). You could probably take Teddy OConner and show him in the larges, You could probably ask Brentina to do the schooling jumpers. Good horses are good horses, it isn’t really the HORSES that are specialized now, it’s the RIDERS!
“Good horses are good horses, it isn’t really the HORSES that are specialized now, it’s the RIDERS!”
I would bet that Rodney Jenkins or Dave Kelly could have done a round over a '60’s outside course with Popeye K and made it look fabulous. You never saw them hanging off the side of a horse to make the bascule look good!
Nothing against todays hunter riders, but the top riders of the sixties had great horsemanship style. Bill Steinkraus, could do 6’ walls with following arms and a perfect seat as though he were doing a horsemanship class.
Small, medium and large ponies jumped the same heights as they do today (2’3", 2’6" and 3’, respectively),
But MY memory is that there were only TWO sizes- Small = under 13h2" (jumping 2’6") and Large = 13h2" to 14h2" (jumping 3’).
For the rest of you who were around then- is my memory defective or the authors? I HAVE the 1964 rule book, but it seems to be in one of the boxes that didn’t get unpacked after the most recent move.
It says But MY memory is that there were only TWO sizes- Small = under 13h2" (jumping 2’6") and Large = 13h2" to 14h2" (jumping 3’).
For the rest of you who were around then- is my memory defective or the authors? I HAVE the 1964 rule book, but it seems to be in one of the boxes that didn’t get unpacked after the most recent move.[/QUOTE]
I noticed that reading the article too. I wasn’t around then so this isn’t my memory, but I’ve always been told that there were only two sizes of ponies then, broken down like you said. The addition of the Medium division came later.
I remember as a kid in the late 70s doing the small/mediums or the larges. Two divisions, not three. This was in New England.
I also recall not being able to school in the ring until, gosh, after I was out of the juniors (1986). There was a warm-up class, sure, but the ring was closed to open schooling. I even got booted out of the jumper ring at Children’s Services when I was trying to hack in there on move-in day circa 1988. Of course, I only had the cajones to try that because I’d witnessed several BNTs actually schooling over the jumps about 30 minutes earlier and NOT getting kicked out.
[QUOTE=sporthorsefilly;2531229]
I totally agree with 2ndyrgal:
I would bet that Rodney Jenkins or Dave Kelly could have done a round over a '60’s outside course with Popeye K and made it look fabulous. You never saw them hanging off the side of a horse to make the bascule look good!
QUOTE]
I would certainly agree with your first point, but must respectfull disagree with your second. RJ almost always hung off the side of the hunters - course he could stand on his head and they still jumped great. But I think it’s safe to say he ‘invented’ the fad of ducking and everyone else tried to imitate it, pro’s and kids alike, not unlike what we see today.
I had to laugh - on the Phelps website today there are two wonderful pics of RJ: one on a hunter doing a CREST release with his butt way up in the air (a la today’s pictures so many people criticize), the other on a jumper using an auto release.
It has always been my personal opinion that RJ really invented the crest release - look at all his pics on the hunters, with a big loop in the reins, hands near the crest. Others tried to imitate it and GM coined the phrase.
I certainly don’t have the same recollection. In that period I rode with Jimmy Williams (So Cal), Butch and Lu Thomas (N Cal) and Ronnie Mutch (Conn) and I NEVER saw a running martingale in the hunters.
The only piece of tack I saw in the 70’s that I would never see today was the use of a breast plate with a standing martingale, and that was only in California in the mid 70’s. It was gone by the late 70’s, as fashion in Cal. followed the trends of the East Coast back then.
This is my a/o hunter who I bought from Jimmy, showed with Butch and Lu and then this picture was taken at Tampa in '78 when I was with Nimrod.
I think Propped said earlier that her early show experience was in the 50s and 60s rather than the 70s. So perhaps in those decades (in California) it was more acceptable to have a running than a standing martingale?
