Counting strides...why??

[LaurieB]

Let me preface this by saying that when I showed in the pony divisions, dinosaurs roamed the earth. So even though I have competed much more recently than that, I still remember a time when fences weren’t set in related lines and riders were meant to be able to find a distance by riding off their eyes. But the current uproar about pony measuring has me wanting to ask a question I have wondered about for a long time. Why did length of stride become a huge part of what defines whether or not a horse is suitable to show in the hunter classes? When did “adding in a line” become such a sin that it will cause an otherwise beautiful round will go unpinned?

Why on earth does it matter so much how long a horse’s stride is? (Nobody ever counts in the hunt field…but I digress.) It seems to me that the main–if not the only–reason that it is so important now for horses and ponies to be right up to size in their divisions (ie, taller than everyone else no matter what must be done to achieve that goal) is because they must have the step to get down the lines. Why can’t a small horse (or pony) have a smooth round with an extra stride in each line? Or a larger horse leave out a stride if it can do so easily and gracefully?

And while I’m asking questions, who decided that a 13 foot stride is optimal? To me, that decision seems as arbitrary as someone deciding that only bays should be eligible to show in the hunter classes. Or just geldings. Or only horses over 17 hands.

Truly I don’t understand the purpose of mandatory stride counts. Would someone please enlighten me?

[M_Owen]

The only case where I can see stride length being a problem is a 1 or 2 stride in and out. Other than that I don’t see why getting the strides is such a big deal. I will say as a rider that knowing the number of strides in a line is much easier.

[doublesstable]

IMHO a competition world has been created for those that have 17 hand + horse with a huge stride.

My guess for this would be it looks more appealing to watch a big Hunter with a big stride vs a smaller quicker one.

But I am with LaurieB in thought.

[SolarFlare]

I’ll take a stab at it:

Hunters are supposed to show an easy ground-covering stride. By quantifying it (ie. making set strides between jumps) it becomes much easier for the judge to determine if the horse is capable of this. If Horse A can flow easily down a 60-foot line in 4 strides, and Horse B ends up putting in 5 (or 4.5, etc) strides in the same distance, then Horse B is not showing itself as able to easily cover ground.

So…perhaps a way of putting some objectivity into such a subjective discipline?

[IPEsq]

Regarding ponies and setting lines for rated pony hunters specifically (versus setting a 12’ stride where ponies do an add or double add from the horse step), the bigger the pony for the height division, the easier it is to make the strides, and yes, it is of most importance where the show sets in and outs. So, having a pony that barely measures for the division on the large end is ideal, because a pony on the smaller end may be having to run down the lines. Some judges may not care about an add so long as the round looks nice (these judges are rare), but it is pretty hard to make adding in an in and out look pretty.

In a more abstract sense, that is also why we have large and small junior hunter divisions. Some judges don’t like watching a horse with a motor in the hunter ring as much as a big, lopey one, so the smaller horses without enormous strides would in theory get penalized for not looking as lopey as the big horses because they have to carry more pace down the lines without really taking into account the other factors making for a good round. That’s another division where 1, 2 and 3 stride related distances are commonplace, so adding really isn’t an option.

[kdow]

It seems like just having certain standards for the judges would be a better solution than obsessing about pony height to the point where ponies are drugged, etc. To get height cards? I feel like a decent judge should be able to mentally adjust for ‘smaller pony, will be taking an extra stride’ vs ‘pony that is not comfortable and scurrying around’? Is that really asking too much of the judges?

[HLMom]

I’ve wondered the same thing as the OP. It is terrible to see horses 14.3-15.2 become the “untouchables” largely because of difficulty making the strides, if I understand what I’ve been told correctly. Personally I would rather see kids/young teens on this size horse than on the 17.3 hand giants that seem so common…

[avesane]

[QUOTE=HLMom;7806872]
It is terrible to see horses 14.3-15.2 become the “untouchables” largely because of difficulty making the strides, if I understand what I’ve been told correctly.[/QUOTE]

Definitely. I have only seen a few shows where the hunters were split into smalls (<16h) and larges (>16h) and I don’t recall the distances being shortened. It takes a VERY special small horse to make those lines and make the distances look great when the heights get over 3’.

[LaurieB]

[QUOTE=SolarFlare;7806729]
I’ll take a stab at it:

Hunters are supposed to show an easy ground-covering stride. By quantifying it (ie. making set strides between jumps) it becomes much easier for the judge to determine if the horse is capable of this. If Horse A can flow easily down a 60-foot line in 4 strides, and Horse B ends up putting in 5 (or 4.5, etc) strides in the same distance, then Horse B is not showing itself as able to easily cover ground.[/QUOTE]

Am I the only one who sees a certain irony in the fact that hunters are meant to have a ground covering stride that is also very slow? And that when they jump they are supposed to leave from the base of the fence, rocket upward, hang for a few seconds achieving the coveted bascule, and then land directly on the other side of the obstacle? So apparently the perfect hunter is supposed to possess a ground covering stride coupled with a non ground covering style of jumping.

[beaujolais]

I think the thinking in getting the numbers is just bizarre and even more bizarre in the equitation.

I explained getting the strides to a very smart but non-horsey friend the other day, in fact. They were quite surprised & agreed that it just doesn’t make sense.

I’m truly hoping “they” will get more flexible on this in the future or that this will completely go away.

[RPM]

I think the changes started when hunter-jumper became a discipline separate from actual hunting. Back when dinosaurs roamed the earth (when I first started riding hunt seat), show hunters were supposed to be horses who actually hunted, therefore they were supposed to go at a good hunting pace, jumping fences similar to those they met out hunting.

Nowadays “hunters” are horses who canter a certain number of strides on a level surface and jump fences that don’t resemble any natural obstacle found anywhere. Handy hunters are no longer asked to lead over one fence, go through a gate, or do anything else to show they are “handy.”

Back in those days you went at a hunting pace; nowadays I guess you count strides at a hunter pace. I was not taught to obsess about counting strides.

[snaffle635]

Unless there are major changes to hunter course design, I don’t see how counting strides can go away. If a designer has to fit 8 jumps in a simple pattern into a small-ish arena (ie not a huge outside course), many of the jumps are going to end up being related distances.

[Big_Grey_hunter]

What I don’t understand is why so many people who don’t show hunters feel the need to ‘ask questions’ while unsubtly telling everyone why they think hunters are stupid and awful and wrong.

If you (generic you) don’t agree with the way modern hunters are judged/ridden/shown/cared for/etc, why not vote with your money and show in a different discipline?

This rant does not apply to those who are genuinely curious or asking honest questions.

[normandy_shores]

. You can’t make every horse have a 13 foot stride. Obviously the 17h horse who goes around in 10’ strides and adds wouldn’t be as suitable, but why the smaller horses and ponies can’t get away with nice distances and strides relative to their height seems bizarre to me. My 15.1 PMU horse has a nice jump, auto changes, but naturally has a 10 or 11’ stride. When I open him up for xc or for stadium and get him really forward 12’-13’ is huge for him. It’s just how it is for some horses.

He’s also not an A level quality horse (and he’s pinto, OH MY!), but he’d do nicely locally and does great in eventing.

Over 2’6
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v99/normandy_shores/Not%20quite%203%20phase/DSC_0024_zpse520f49b.jpg)

(and no, I’m probably not breathing in this picture and just clutching my neck strap!)
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v99/normandy_shores/topline_zpsbfe60cc0.jpg)

[GoodTimes]

I’m with Big_Grey_Hunter on this one.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a horse add down a 4 or 5 stride line and make it look as appealing as a horse who naturally walks down that line in the correct number of strides. Similarly, it never looks as nice when a horse leaves a stride out, even if it’s an 18hh giant warmblood.

I really don’t think this is an issue up for debate at the upper levels. A horse that is athletic enough to jump 3’ and over should be able to make it down 12’ strides. At the lower levels and with beginner riders maybe the judges should be more lenient, but I also think that related distances are good teaching tools.

[ponysize]

If it makes you feel any better OP, when I rode hunters, I never counted strides. I just rode the fences. Most of the time, I got it right. Maybe we hung out with the same dinosaurs?

[harrisburgrules]

[QUOTE=GoodTimes;7807073]
I’m with Big_Grey_Hunter on this one.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a horse add down a 4 or 5 stride line and make it look as appealing as a horse who naturally walks down that line in the correct number of strides. Similarly, it never looks as nice when a horse leaves a stride out, even if it’s an 18hh giant warmblood.

I really don’t think this is an issue up for debate at the upper levels. A horse that is athletic enough to jump 3’ and over should be able to make it down 12’ strides. At the lower levels and with beginner riders maybe the judges should be more lenient, but I also think that related distances are good teaching tools.[/QUOTE]

agreed. it represents the overall style of hunters. it’s also just a tool used to judge the style of riders or horses. for example, if there is a line at medal finals that could be done in 7 strides or 8 strides, the riders who are able to lengthen and do a nice 7 are almost always rewarded over those who do a conservative 8. it’s not the actual number that matters… it’s symbolic of a confident ride.

[kdow]

[QUOTE=GoodTimes;7807073]
I’m with Big_Grey_Hunter on this one.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a horse add down a 4 or 5 stride line and make it look as appealing as a horse who naturally walks down that line in the correct number of strides. Similarly, it never looks as nice when a horse leaves a stride out, even if it’s an 18hh giant warmblood.[/QUOTE]

But “look” is subjective, right? If you were used to seeing an 8’ stride pattern between jumps, then anything else would look weird, too. Because your eye is expecting to see X number of strides. So is there something special about the current stride length that should make it optimal for all horses? If not, why is everyone so wedded to it? Dressage judges get all kinds of training to supposedly help them judge fairly and not be caught out because a horse is a funny color or whatever - what is the process for hunter judges? Can just anyone be a judge, or is there training required provided by the governing organization? If so, why couldn’t the training focus on looking at the individual horse, not how well it got the striding? If the goal is to demonstrate ride ability and comfort in the hunt and so on, then I’m not sure why a smaller horse that has precision control with no apparent rider effort and a nice gait should do worse than a bigger horse that gets the strides but is more of a handful? But from reading posts here, no one would want the smaller horse because it wouldn’t get the strides.

I am legitimately confused. The history of hunters fascinates me, but hunters as it is now seems very confusing from the outside looking in. (Particularly since I thought there was a suitability component to the judging? And yet you see people on horses that don’t actually looked suitably sized for them necessarily, because of the striding issue and the fashion. Is everyone just ignoring that part?) (To be fair, dressage has also for a while had a tendency towards very large horses and that also perplexes me. You aren’t judged by appearance so much there, but how on earth do you properly use your leg on the horse if you kind of look like a lead line kid perched on top because you just don’t have the length of leg for the horse?)

I mean, to be honest as far as the people are concerned I don’t care much - be judged by whatever standards you want as long as you aren’t hurting the horses. But with the whole issue of pony measuring because of getting the strides it sounds like the current system IS encouraging poor horsemanship to get a pony to measure, and I don’t understand why the stride numbers are so important that the judging standard can’t be tweaked so that a good ride on a good horse/pony is a good ride, even if they took Y strides instead of X to do it.

[harrisburgrules]

[QUOTE=kdow;7807128]
But “look” is subjective, right? If you were used to seeing an 8’ stride pattern between jumps, then anything else would look weird, too. Because your eye is expecting to see X number of strides. So is there something special about the current stride length that should make it optimal for all horses? If not, why is everyone so wedded to it? Dressage judges get all kinds of training to supposedly help them judge fairly and not be caught out because a horse is a funny color or whatever - what is the process for hunter judges? Can just anyone be a judge, or is there training required provided by the governing organization? If so, why couldn’t the training focus on looking at the individual horse, not how well it got the striding? If the goal is to demonstrate ride ability and comfort in the hunt and so on, then I’m not sure why a smaller horse that has precision control with no apparent rider effort and a nice gait should do worse than a bigger horse that gets the strides but is more of a handful? But from reading posts here, no one would want the smaller horse because it wouldn’t get the strides.

I am legitimately confused. The history of hunters fascinates me, but hunters as it is now seems very confusing from the outside looking in. (Particularly since I thought there was a suitability component to the judging? And yet you see people on horses that don’t actually looked suitably sized for them necessarily, because of the striding issue and the fashion. Is everyone just ignoring that part?) (To be fair, dressage has also for a while had a tendency towards very large horses and that also perplexes me. You aren’t judged by appearance so much there, but how on earth do you properly use your leg on the horse if you kind of look like a lead line kid perched on top because you just don’t have the length of leg for the horse?)

I mean, to be honest as far ass the people are concerned I don’t care much - be judged by whatever standards you want as long as you aren’t hurting the horses. But with the whole issue of pony measuring because of getting the strides it sounds like the current system IS encouraging poor horsemanship to get a pony to measure, and I don’t understand why the stride numbers are so important that the judging standard can’t be tweaked so that a good ride on a good horse/pony is a good ride, even if they took Y strides instead of X to do it.[/QUOTE]

as i said on the thread about ponies… I have always thought that the strides are way too long for ponies and that is what is the problem with measurements. even ponies that are average size have to run down the lines sometimes and it’s scary when you have little kids involved. i think horse striding is much less difficult. yes, there are some horses that really have to GO to get the strides, but most don’t.

i’ve always thought that main motivator for measuring down is pony strides… so on that… they need to fix that.

[Big_Grey_hunter]

It’s not a height problem. My 17h hunter struggled to get the lines, while my little 16.1h TB walked the lines and could easily take out. The small juniors get the strides just fine.

Not every horse is suited for every discipline. The same is true if you show a downhill, bad moving horse in dressage, a heavy, unathletic water phobic horse in eventing, or a warmblood in reining. It’s pointless to stomp your feet and complain the disciple is wrong and should change to suit you. Your options are easy, 1) buy a horse that is suited to the discipline, 2) take your not-so-suited horse to a different discipline, or 3) show your not-so-suited horse and know you won’t win.