Bouncing Bottoms

[Winding_Down]

bfne… well now I am confused as I have been convinced that the technicality of courses has increased significantly, at least between the early 90s to the mid 2000s. I recall big gallopy courses back then at least at prelim and intermediate, and much less technical combinations compared to what I completed over the past several years. Maybe my memory of my past competitions is failing me… but I don’t think I’m quite that senile yet… :concern:

As far as the top older trainer stating what I said above… I am reporting what I heard and I know I heard correctly… not sure what there is to disagree about this time around…

[bornfreenowexpensive]

[QUOTE=Winding Down;7673268]
bfne… well now I am confused as I have been convinced that the technicality of courses has increased significantly, at least between the early 90s to the mid 2000s. I recall big gallopy courses back then at least at prelim and intermediate, and much less technical combinations compared to what I completed over the past several years. Maybe my memory of my past competitions is failing me… but I don’t think I’m quite that senile yet…

As far as the top older trainer stating what I said above… I am reporting what I heard and I know I heard correctly… not sure what there is to disagree about this time around…[/QUOTE]

Not at the highest levels. It has changed…there are more narrows. More ways to cause a run out. BUT that is not the only way a course can be “technical”. The old courses, if you missed, you were more likely to have a bad fall. The courses were just as “technical” and required accurate and bold riding…courses today do as well, just they are designed to hopefully more likely have a run out. Just watch a lot of the videos…and you see they are technical. Just in different ways. I remember a LOT more very vertical faced fences…and big honking jumps that you didn’t want to miss…and bounces right after long gallops down a hill.

I do think you see a lot more narrows now…and I do think that there are a few more technical questions now asked at Prelim and Intermediate…but not that much. I do think when I was younger…I thought it was easier though.

[Winding_Down]

@bornfreenowexpensive;7673276

<snip> …It has changed…there are more narrows. More ways to cause a run out. BUT that is not the only way a course can be “technical”. The old courses, if you missed, you were more likely to have a bad fall. The courses were just as “technical” and required accurate and bold riding…courses today do as well, just they are designed to hopefully more likely have a run out.

Well the courses are far more technical, and require a lot more transitions (forward and back) than they did in years past. You see many more a-b-c-d combinations, more turns and changes of directions. The long format was replaced by more technical and stop and go sorts of xc courses.

And I don’t want to say that the horses of today are better than the ones in the past. They are just different. They don’t require the endurance but they do require the fitness and strength. You see more warmbloods, and less tb blood required for this reason.

[bornfreenowexpensive]

[QUOTE=Winding Down;7673569]
They don’t require the endurance but they do require the fitness and strength. You see more warmbloods, and less tb blood required for this reason.[/QUOTE]

You do and you don’t. There have been a lot of studies by event horse breeders on the percentage of blood in the winners of the 4*…and it is still mostly TB and high blood. There were lots of Irish back in the long format…and still today. Having talked with several BNR…even ones who rode WBs…they want/prefer them with a higher blood (preferably 75%+)

I agree that the courses are different…my point was more that the old courses still required good riding and horses with a 5th leg. They were not just steeple chasing over single fences in a point and shoot manner.

[GutsNGlory]

Denny also just posted this on his page this morning (you know he is reading the forums!):

Another thing that makes any real event rider puke is watching riders on cross country sitting in the saddle between fences because they are too damn unfit to help the horse by getting off its back.
Sure, settle into the tack before takeoff, and going down steep hills, or on sharp turns, but otherwise, get off his back and let him use his body without your floppy body flailing around up there messing him up.
Walt Gervais used to gallop in Hudson`s Field with us when we were getting horses fit for Rolex. He could hold his position for AT LEAST 15 minutes, and he was 76, 77, 78 at the time, so NO DAMN EXCUSES.

[Huntin_Pony]

“I have heard the very top older trainers state that they would struggle to ride the technical courses of today and that they are no longer the “experts” on how to really ride a 4* course…”

The question that comes to mind is yes, but what were they REALLY saying?

For instance, someone might say this if they felt that the new 4* courses were so different that it amounts to a different sport, possibly one of less interest to this particular person. If that were the case, the speaker might really mean that they haven’t put in the effort to be expert on the new courses because it’s not their cup of tea.

I’m certainly not ascribing this thought process to the person(s) you paraphrased because I have no idea who that was, but some people could feel this way.

[JER]

[QUOTE=Huntin’ Pony;7673934]
“I have heard the very top older trainers state that they would struggle to ride the technical courses of today and that they are no longer the “experts” on how to really ride a 4* course…”

The question that comes to mind is yes, but what were they REALLY saying? [/QUOTE]

The fact is that some of the top riders now were top riders a heck of a long time ago. Mark Todd rode in the 1978 World Championships and won Badminton in 1980. Andrew Nicholson was Mark Todd’s groom at that Badminton and was himself on the 1984 Olympic team. Mary King’s first Badminton was in the early 1980s, too.

Although I have no idea who the OP is referring to, I think Mike Plumb would qualify by anyone’s standards as a ‘very top older trainer’, and he wouldn’t share that view. At all. Yesterday we were talking about the unregulated horror shows that used to pass for eventing – the underwater jumps at the Mexico City Olympics, the Bromont course for 1976. It wasn’t like you just pointed your horse and jumped; there was a serious price to pay for not getting it right.

One thing that Mike does say is that under the long format, when you went out on XC and again in SJ, you weren’t riding the horse that you trained every day. On XC, you were riding a horse who’d done roads and tracks and steeplechase – none of which you’d do before XC schooling at home or at one-day HTs. On SJ, you were riding a truly knackered horse. At least now, the rider does get to ride the horse they trained. I would think that would make jumping easier, from a technical point of view.

[wildlifer]

I 100% agree that the imaginary “good ol’ days” were not some sort of steeplechase run. I stood by the Lexington Bank at Rolex in the late 80’s, holy mother of that was some desperate riding! There also used to be a LOT of post and rail bounce-through pens/complexes that flipped a LOT of horses (people just didn’t like taking the long option…until 3 or 4 falls…).

I have heaps of my old Rolex pics (we only lives 40 mins from KHP), wish video cameras had been cheap and accessible back then, but I do sort of have videos in my head; KHP was a huge and unforgettable part of my childhood…

Wait, how did we get from panties to long format?

[Winding_Down]

[QUOTE=Huntin’ Pony;7673934]
“I have heard the very top older trainers state that they would struggle to ride the technical courses of today and that they are no longer the “experts” on how to really ride a 4* course…”

The question that comes to mind is yes, but what were they REALLY saying?

For instance, someone might say this if they felt that the new 4* courses were so different that it amounts to a different sport, possibly one of less interest to this particular person. If that were the case, the speaker might really mean that they haven’t put in the effort to be expert on the new courses because it’s not their cup of tea.

I’m certainly not ascribing this thought process to the person(s) you paraphrased because I have no idea who that was, but some people could feel this way.[/QUOTE]

HP, you’re probably right. Indeed, I think that many people feel this way. But they can still be awesome trainers for those of us who don’t aspire to do 4* courses. The basics are all still the same. Always will be. Good riding is good riding.

[Winding_Down]

[QUOTE=GutsNGlory;7673880]
Denny also just posted this on his page this morning (you know he is reading the forums!):

:D[/QUOTE]

Denny also just posted this on his page this morning (you know he is reading the forums!):

Another thing that makes any real event rider puke is watching riders on cross country sitting in the saddle between fences because they are too damn unfit to help the horse by getting off its back.
Sure, settle into the tack before takeoff, and going down steep hills, or on sharp turns, but otherwise, get off his back and let him use his body without your floppy body flailing around up there messing him up.
Walt Gervais used to gallop in Hudson`s Field with us when we were getting horses fit for Rolex. He could hold his position for AT LEAST 15 minutes, and he was 76, 77, 78 at the time, so NO DAMN EXCUSES.

Indeed! I was at MDHT again yesterday. Two observations: again the riders who do well at 3* and above were invariably OUT of the tack. I saw a couple go around at prelim who I don’t’ know but who really did sit about the whole way around and I just don’t know why… at prelim, skinny fit looking little things just sitting and bouncing (albeit lightly) around. They were typically on more forward horses but no one needs to sit on galloping stretches, My Goodness!

Second observation. I had a difficult time getting my baby horse forward last weekend and this weekend, I purposely sat down 4-6 strides out from each fence to get him up and in front of my leg. This was highly effective as he jumped much better and much stronger than last weekend. It was a bit of a lightbulb moment as I realized that my hotter more forward horses of the recent past never required that I do this on xc as they were forward and balanced and jumping out of stride. Baby horse (who is very warmblood: Luz Z to a Cavalier mare) is much more skeptical about forward motion. So sitting really did make a big difference. Big a$$ honkin spurs also helped :lol:

This is what I get for not having competed below prelim for awhile. I have ridden and trained babies but I haven’t competed them for quite some time.

And thanks to a wonderful BNT who watched the video from last week and said, “Heck, this is an easy fix! Just get him in front of your leg.” Bingo, lightbulb, duh, and it was an easy fix.

Hopefully I did not have a bouncing bottom during those sit moments, :eek: