Counting strides...why??

[IPEsq]

Ok ok, perhaps I was being too general, but if we didn’t think that large ponies had a bigger step than mediums, then why would we adjust the lines at all? Why not just have them all on a 12’ stride with no in and outs and you pick whatever number is suitable for your pony? That’s not how rated pony hunters are set up currently.

Of course you are correct that height isn’t the only factor for stride length. I had a small junior who could walk the lines and one who had to motor, and they were the same size. I concede that you could have a top end of the scale measure pony that can’t make the strides. The analogy I made to the small/large juniors is the same, though. Why else did that split occur, with age being a secondary split? Small/large split is based on the idea that odds are there are more horses over 16hh that can go slow on a 13’ stride line than ones under 16hh. But no, not every horse is suited for that division no matter what their height. I’ll add that my small junior with a big step was actually protested once and we had to re-measure (unless we put him in platform shoes he was never going to make a large measure, but we had to jump through all the hoops with the steward anyway).

[Madeline]

Back in the dark ages, when the juniors needed to be split, they did it by odd and even numbers. Very fair.

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=Faith;7807771]
You are my hero. As a fox hunter of more years than I’d like to count and also remembering real, outside courses, this drives me insane.[/QUOTE]

I watched the livestream from Harrisburg of the fox hunter class the other night. Most of those horses looked like they would have been much more comfortable if someone had taught their riders to count strides. I have never seen so many chips, heart-stopping long spots, riders jumping ahead, riders getting left behind. There was just a lot of really bad riding that night.

On a positive note, those horses are absolute saints.

[AmmyByNature]

[QUOTE=IPEsq;7808372]
Ok ok, perhaps I was being too general, but if we didn’t think that large ponies had a bigger step than mediums, then why would we adjust the lines at all? Why not just have them all on a 12’ stride with no in and outs and you pick whatever number is suitable for your pony? That’s not how rated pony hunters are set up currently. [/QUOTE]

We have that division. It’s called the Children’s Pony Hunters.

[harrisburgrules]

[QUOTE=AmmyByNature;7808897]
We have that division. It’s called the Children’s Pony Hunters.[/QUOTE]

DING DING DING!! People that have been discussing the pony division changes should also be discussing how children’s ponies fit into this. always another option for in between ponies or ponies that have trouble with the higher jumps/strides

[kdow]

@AmmyByNature;7807565

I love it when people mention nefarious whither shaving. It’s just clipping the whither hair really short. “Shaving” the hair on the whither.

The most recent time I encountered mention of it, it was specifically referencing a pony with “funny” withers shape and implied some kind of surgery had been done. That seems like a nasty rumor type thing, and I really really hope it is, but given stuff like what goes on with some Tennessee Walkers and Big Lick, it is obvious that if there is enough money involved some people will do really awful awful things to horses, so I never feel like I can for sure dismiss things that seem over the top ridiculous ENTIRELY.

(Some people should just not have care of a living creature. These people turn up in all different places, as long as there is money/fame/power to be had, so I am not picking on Hunters or TWH here. Just explaining why I don’t go ‘okay, there is just no way anyone would ever try that.’)

[Bogie]

[QUOTE=LaurieB;7806942]
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.[/QUOTE]

As a foxhunter, I appreciate the irony. Your typical show ring hunter would be left in the dust.

I still remember competing over outside courses that actually encouraged your horse to move forward.

[doublesstable]

Things change that’s for sure - Here is a video of Bernie Traurig in the late 60’s in a hunter class.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukuWzkw8iHI

[JustJump]

[QUOTE=LaurieB;7806942]
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.[/QUOTE]

I came to the realization some time ago that ‘ground covering’ in the show hunter sense of the word simply means big, and does not imply that a horse is traveling at a significant pace.

That LURCH off the ground seems to me to be CAUSED by this lack of pace, which produces that stop-action bascule (i.e. it’s not an efficient jump, more of a desperate one, returning to earth in a heap on the other side of the fence.

It makes a good photo, but it’s a rather ugly way to achieve the end, IMO, with each jump providing an interruption to the pace, if there is one. Only big horses can succeed, the bigger the better, and for this reason even have to go SLOWER, because many of them probably have a 14’ stride if they were allowed to proceed at a more comfortable and forward pace.

[LaurieB]

[QUOTE=doublesstable;7809377]
Things change that’s for sure - Here is a video of Bernie Traurig in the late 60’s in a hunter class.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukuWzkw8iHI[/QUOTE]

I jumped that course numerous times. Fairfield was always my favorite place to show.

[french_fry]

[QUOTE=JustJump;7809405]
I came to the realization some time ago that ‘ground covering’ in the show hunter sense of the word simply means big, and does not imply that a horse is traveling at a significant pace.

That LURCH off the ground seems to me to be CAUSED by this lack of pace, which produces that stop-action bascule (i.e. it’s not an efficient jump, more of a desperate one, returning to earth in a heap on the other side of the fence.

It makes a good photo, but it’s a rather ugly way to achieve the end, IMO, with each jump providing an interruption to the pace, if there is one. Only big horses can succeed, the bigger the better, and for this reason even have to go SLOWER, because many of them probably have a 14’ stride if they were allowed to proceed at a more comfortable and forward pace.[/QUOTE]

Cool story bro.

Maybe just don’t show the hunters?

[RugBug]

[QUOTE=french fry;7809667]
Cool story bro.

Maybe just don’t show the hunters?[/QUOTE]

It’s not a “story”…it’s what is happening.

the whole “if you don’t like it, play somewhere else” mentality is very immature and has the potential to lead to some ugly places. That is the response from just about every discipline that is called into question. Don’t like the shuffle-y tranter and peanut rolling of Western Pleasure? Then just don’t do it.

People that care about the sport are willing to look at it for what it is and where the things are going overboard and desire to see change…change that is good for the horses. If that starts on an internet bulletin board, great.

I LOVE hunters. Along with equitation, it’s my preferred discipline. There is nothing like a good hunter cantering around a course in beautiful rhythm and meeting the jumps dead on. But I HATE where the hunters are headed. The loped lines, extreme jump are ugly. Not all hunters are being shown this way but there are a lot who are…and they are rewarded for it. It’s our version of the tranter…and someone needs to mention it.

[french_fry]

[QUOTE=RugBug;7809749]
It’s our version of the tranter…and someone needs to mention it.[/QUOTE]

But they have. Ad infinitum.

Based on how often threads like this that are created solely for the purpose of bashing the hunters via “back in my day” adages, I would say that complaining about it on an internet bulletin board is doing exactly nothing. Ergo, my suggestion to show a different discipline. Or, if you want to actually do something about it, take it up in a place that’s not an internet forum.

[MIKES_MCS]

we cannot put the genie back in the bottle. What’s happened has happened for many reasons not the least being teaching to SHOW rather then learning to ride. How much easier is it to know how many strides you ride down a line before you jump rather then rely on your eye , just as it is easier to grab mane or employ a crest release, rather then follow your horse with your hand over the fence and rely on a strong base . What was once a teaching method now has become the accepted way … while I do believe their are still plenty of riders who actually can ride , I have seen to many “riders” go from 6 months of lessons, to the Wellington 2 ft rings by way of their check book . It always surprises me when people read more into what is happening today in the sport then really is, It’s a business , EVERYTHING that has come about, has evolved into what it is, for one reason only , to make more money , it really is as simple as that.

[Cannonball]

[QUOTE=ynl063w;7808845]
I watched the livestream from Harrisburg of the fox hunter class the other night. Most of those horses looked like they would have been much more comfortable if someone had taught their riders to count strides. I have never seen so many chips, heart-stopping long spots, riders jumping ahead, riders getting left behind. There was just a lot of really bad riding that night.

On a positive note, those horses are absolute saints.[/QUOTE]

I saw that also. It was really bad. It looked like the short stirrup riders had been thrown into the children’s hunter ring. There were a few good trips, but most were scary!

[Lord_Helpus]

“Shaving the withers” means just that: Physically removing the top of the bone which forms the withers. It is surgery and it is done more often that you might think.

I had a lovely ammie horse for sale in Florida years ago and there was an interested buyer. They were planning to shave his withers to take an inch off his height so he could show as a small junior.

I told my trainer that my horse was not to be sold to that trainer or that barn or to any one else associated with that barn. And I told my trainer to specifically ask anyone interested in such a thing to walk away because a clause would be put in the sales contract which would specifically ban that practice.

Yes, it is done, because winning is everything. How else can top trainers justify the huge fees they charge unless little Susie brings home the blue ribbons.

I don’t understand why our hunter people cannot take a look at the Western Pleasure division ---- you can hardly tell the walk from the jog and the jog from the canter. That is the way we are headed now.

[netg]

@sonomacounty;7806982

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

While I don’t like the trend in hunters, and it’s just a personal opinion - I think required strides in eq make a LOT of sense. A great eq rider will be able to change up how many strides a horse takes with ease, smoothly, without much obvious difference in tempo.

Heck, I was NEVER a great eq rider, but on a little school morgan I managed to take a 1 stride as a bounce, 1 stride and 2 stride when playing with stride length. He was even more adjustable on longer lines. It just seems a standard which should be checked in eq.

[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]

Athletic and long strided aren’t synonymous. I do tend to agree that for the top of a discipline you need a horse suited to it, and I don’t think hunters should be different from other disciplines in that regard (though I would love it it were training which won in every discipline in a utopia…) I had a VERY athletic QH who easily jumped 4’ courses - and not higher courses only because I was a chicken and didn’t want to, though my trainer jumped him well over 4’ individual jumps. As is common among QH, even though he was an early 80s baby back when they were bred to be athletes, he had a shorter stride. No way that horse could have done 12’ strides with ease no matter what an amazing athlete he was.

@Cannonball;7807661

It’s interesting that all the explanations for counting strides reference a horse adding a stride and being penalized. Leaving out a stride is also severely penalized. But the logic of a ground covering stride should reward a horse that is able to do a 4 stride line in a nice flowing 3. And there are horses that could easily do that but don’t because it is penalized.

This one I don’t get - because the easy flow part of judging would tend to penalize if they were running to get the longer stride - but if it were natural to have a longer loping stride and they could meet the fences neatly with one fewer stride, why not?

[whbar158]

As someone who had a 15.1h QH with a questionable stride, but has also ridden others with no problems with strides, I still think its silly. the whole “What about the in and out” trust me unless I were to chip the first I wasn’t adding in the in and out most horses can make the in and outs fine but when the line is set at 85’ for a 6 stride the little lost every stride starts to count more and while the ponies do have the children’s pony division the Children’s horse division is still pretty competitive and you sure can’t add in it and expect to place either. You have to step all the way down to pre-child/adult and even then some judges still aren’t ok with it. Now if a judge wants to take two equal rounds and give the one who had a bigger stride and did the “number” the placing over the one who added that is ok, but no I do not think someone with a chip/missed change etc beat out someone who had a really nice round but added smoothly. Of course it is my opinion and it doesn’t matter if anyone agrees, I really enjoy the challenge of the hunters and love riding a nice relaxed round nailing all my distances and corners and it being very smooth, since that is the goal for me!

[kdow]

[QUOTE=doublesstable;7809377]
Things change that’s for sure - Here is a video of Bernie Traurig in the late 60’s in a hunter class.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukuWzkw8iHI[/QUOTE]

That looks so much more enjoyable to try (from the outside looking in) than a lot of what I’ve seen posted as videos for hunters now. I do like a ride with a bit of ‘go’ though. (Not running around nuts, some lower level jumpers are terrifying to watch. But I’ve always preferred to ride the horses who like forward to the ones who prefer “I don’t wanna move, that’s work!” And a lot of current hunters kind of lack that impression of forward when I see the videos.)

[Linny]

[QUOTE=AmmyByNature;7807565]
I love it when people mention nefarious whither shaving. It’s just clipping the whither hair really short. “Shaving” the hair on the whither.

As far as striding, it’s vital in the in and outs which I believe are based on the distance between neighboring fence lines.

And the children’s pony division is for kids on the nice easy ponies that are suitable and add up. The regular ponies are for the standouts where the jumps are bigger and the striding is tougher.

Not every horse and kid are cut out for the juniors, and not every pony and kid are cut out for the regulars. If your pair can’t cut it in the regulars you have a whole other division to show in.[/QUOTE]

The problem wih the pony proposal is that my 14.1 Children’s pony who jumps well but not as well as division ponies will probably pin over those smalls and mediums because of his size advantage when it comes to getting the lines.