Burgundy Show Jackets?

[Small_Change]

[QUOTE=HP’sblueskyenterprise;8589113]
I doubt that in days of old, when they were fox hunting and some nobleman showed up in a dark purplish/burgundy coat they told him to take a hike…;)but I might be wrong. [/QUOTE]

Most hunts are welcoming to new people, even if they aren’t dressed quite right, so long as things are safe. I almost typed “safe and tidy,” but I have seen the tidy part become optional in some cases… There are, however, hunts that expect you to be turned out exactly according to their rules and tradition, and those who might allow you to cap with them if you’re not turned out just so, but then have a quiet chat with you once you apply to become a member. There’s a whole spectrum as to what is allowable with various hunts, just like with anything else.

[mroades]

Just because you like it doesn’t mean I have to and I don’t.

[beaujolais]

"With both USEF and Equine Canada, any member can submit a rule change proposal. Then the involving discipline committee needs to read it over and decide whether they want to make it rule change or not. "

Can some of you please do this? I am not a member right now.

[HP_sblueskyenterprise]

[QUOTE=mroades;8590742]
Just because you like it doesn’t mean I have to and I don’t.[/QUOTE]

Did I miss something…

[Daventry]

[QUOTE=mroades;8590742]
Just because you like it doesn’t mean I have to and I don’t.[/QUOTE]

Being devil’s advocate here but…“if” burgundy became an acceptable and approved hunter jacket color under USEF rules, no, you don’t have to like it, but you could not fault a rider for wearing it.

Only mentioning this because I think you’re starting to scare a few competitors here. :lol:

[JenEM]

[QUOTE=HP’sblueskyenterprise;8589113]
So basically if I want to have a little fun with my horse, and think that color Burgundy enhances her appearance, I should basically hightail it to the jumper ring even though my horse is a hunter? I doubt that in days of old, when they were fox hunting and some nobleman showed up in a dark purplish/burgundy coat they told him to take a hike…;)but I might be wrong. [/QUOTE]

Pretty sure that in the days of old, no one who wasn’t staff would have dared show up at the hunt with a red coat. That would have Not Been Done.

Maybe we can bring back Appointments classes?

[HP_sblueskyenterprise]

I never thought of it as falling under the category of red.

[findeight]

Burgundy jackets have made the rounds in the Hunters, late 70s to late 80s (the heyday of the rust breeches). But they were on the brownish side of the family not red/purple. Certainly not bright and they were classically styled, not cut like the ones pictured in the links, styles currently en vogue over in the Jumper ring.

They were pinned according to performance back then. But, IMO, those were quite a bit more conservative then what most are thinking of here.

[Trixie]

I find it more brown than red. With a pair of appropriately matched breeches and brown boots, it could basically fall under ratcatcher attire, albeit not formal attire. I just have a hard time finding it to be all that outlandish.

But hey, I’m just an ammy, not a judge. But I’d rather see a good trip from an appropriately attired person in burgundy than some other trends.

[Trixie]

I find it more brown than red. With a pair of appropriately matched breeches and brown boots, it could basically fall under ratcatcher attire, albeit not formal attire. I just have a hard time finding it to be all that outlandish.

But hey, I’m just an ammy, not a judge. But I’d rather see a good trip from an appropriately attired person in burgundy than some other trends.

[Trixie]

Also, FWIW, it isn’t that long ago that the rule was "“Riders should wear coats of any tweed or Melton for hunting (conservative wash jackets in season), breeches or jodhpurs and boots. Conservative colored protective headgear with no additional adornments in accordance with GR801.3 is mandatory.”

I think it was just in the last few years that color was even specified for coats, but we’ve definitely gotten away from tweeds and meltons. (Well, some of you have. I still happily show in my tweed hacking jacket which is fully and 100% appropriate in the hunt field and probably falls under “green” anyway)

[Soaponarope]

[QUOTE=Daventry;8590878]
Being devil’s advocate here but…“if” burgundy became an acceptable and approved hunter jacket color under USEF rules, no, you don’t have to like it, but you could not fault a rider for wearing it.

Only mentioning this because I think you’re starting to scare a few competitors here. :lol:[/QUOTE]

Well, it can pay off to be scared though :eek:

I’d hate to think of someone investing in a jacket only to be unable to wear it. Worse, I’d hate to see someone - and I have seen it - be disqualified or penalized because of unconventional tack or illegal color.

That does happen so we shouldn’t create an impression that it’s no big deal and judges don’t care.

These things may be softening in a more service-oriented culture. I just saw a new USEF or USHJA rule (can’t remember which) that says they can no longer disqualify you from the eq for black stirrups. I saw this happen to someone in a local association that follows USEF rules and it was awful. The judge wouldn’t score her at the year end final. That’s a really hard way to learn that lesson.

So even if things are loosening up, I wouldn’t bet on it with any particular judge at any particular level.

I also think Jessica Springsteen looks amazing in her burgundy jacket. But not so amazing I would let my daughter throw a class away over wearing it.

[findeight]

Suppose if she rode like JS and you mounted her on Hunter equivalents to her current horses? She could wear rust breeches, brown field boots and a tasteful, muted, traditionally cut burgundy jacket and win.

[Soaponarope]

[QUOTE=findeight;8591476]
Suppose if she rode like JS and you mounted her on Hunter equivalents to her current horses? She could wear rust breeches, brown field boots and a tasteful, muted, traditionally cut burgundy jacket and win.[/QUOTE]

That would be lovely:)

[Daventry]

[QUOTE=Soaponarope;8591454]

I just saw a new USEF or USHJA rule (can’t remember which) that says they can no longer disqualify you from the eq for black stirrups. [/QUOTE]

Can you please let me know where you saw this? As per USEF rules, black stirrup irons are still illegal: “Stirrups must be silver in color or non-colored stainless steel. Riders entering the ring with stirrups that do not conform will be eliminated.”

Most riders do not realize that the sole reason for this is because it can become incredibly difficult for a judge to see the riders leg and stirrup if they are all the way across the ring. Obviously, losing one’s stirrup in an Eq class would be frowned upon. Keeping the black stirrup irons out of the ring allows the judge to get a better view of the leg and stirrup.

[Soaponarope]

Yes Daventry, it is a rule effective December 1, 2016. EQ105.6

Recommends stainless steel stirrups for above reason. “However, it also states that ‘judges may not eliminate a rider for using a particular style of stirrup iron.’”

It’s in the March issue of In Stride on p. 52.

[Soaponarope]

So actually I find the new rule unclear. Does “particular style” just refer to hinged, etc.? Or does it also extend to the plastic stirrups which are mainly black?

[Soaponarope]

I know GM doesn’t like the hinged stirrups. But I never heard of anyone being eliminated because of them.

[Daventry]

[QUOTE=Soaponarope;8591564]
Yes Daventry, it is a rule effective December 1, 2016. EQ105.6

Recommends stainless steel stirrups for above reason. “However, it also states that ‘judges may not eliminate a rider for using a particular style of stirrup iron.’”

It’s in the March issue of In Stride on p. 52.[/QUOTE]

I haven’t gotten the issue yet, so that’s why I haven’t seen anything. I would have to read it to know for sure…but “style” is a very different subject than “color”. I’m guessing black is still grounds for elimination, but I would need to read what is stated in the current issue.

As of January 29, 2016, the current USEF Eq105.6 rule stated: "Stirrups must be silver in color or non-colored stainless steel. Riders entering the ring with stirrups that do not conform will be eliminated. (Exception: quick release safety stirrups and stirrups with jointed branches are permitted when the remaining area of the stirrup branch is silver in color or non-colored stainless steel and does not unduly obscure the judge’s view of the rider’s foot in the stirrup). "

[mroades]

I was faced with the stirrup issue just this past weekend. (As a judge) I called the steward over and had her inform the trainer, who slapped her head and said she had forgotten. I called usef hotline to make sure, and was told that, yes it is still a rule, but that Dec 1 of this year it would become " judge’s discretion". I’m not a fan of that decision but nothing I can do.
As far as the burgundy coats, if you’re the winner then so be it, I still don’t have to like them. I sat with an R judge who has judged indoors who called over to the gate and had the trainer informed " if that child would like a score in the second round of this derby, that she will not return to the ring with that blingy belt on". Just sayin…