Hard returns/paragraph breaks! Please. HAVE MERCY ON MY EYES 
We also have an aging baby boomer population of equestrians who still want to ride and show. Even if they are capable riders… they are often dealing with multiple physical issues and falls which increases anxiety and fear and impedes their best riding performance. Speaking for myself - yes!
I understand trainers wanting to protect their aarp clients from a big spook or buck or run off but ace is not the answer.
As far as juniors not being able to ride anymore… I don’t know about that! I know quite a few that ride great and some that don’t. Not everyone has natural feel or has the opportunity to ride enough on their own learning from their horses.
[QUOTE=ynl063w;8649799]
If it had been showing as a small, then it hadn’t shown over 2’6" and should have been eligible to show medium green under the normal rules.[/QUOTE]
Maybe…don’t know what the normal rule was almost 20 years ago but trainer was disciplined for something, not drug related, involving that Pony and it moved to Regulars the rest of that season. With a different trainer. Poor little girl was not popular with her peer group. At all. Even got booed. Trainer didn’t care, they won the rest didn’t matter, quite a jerk about it too.
A few quick thoughts here:
-
This thread is painting the industry–and its winners–with a broad brush. Yes, I agree that unethical practices are a problem, and an unfortunately widespread one. But I also think that there are many legitimately ethical professionals in the business. And the good ones still have a lot of success at the very biggest shows. I don’t say that because I’m naive or don’t scrutinize bills or fail to show up at 5 a.m. (I do all those things.) This is good news–it should give us all hope that you can win without cheating and should provide right-thinking customers with incentives to seek out good actors to train with.
-
There seems to be a lot of broad disapproval of any kind of preparation for the show ring as bad. That seems crazy to me. Not every horse is going to walk out of its stall or trailer and into the show ring at its best, no matter how suitable or well-trained.
An important part of good horsemanship is figuring out what each particular horse needs to be in the right mental and physical place to compete at its best. Some horses need a few minutes on the lunge line to stretch their legs or get out a few bucks. Some need a hack in the ring to see the sights. Some need a warmup day at the show. Some need some rather advanced flatwork in the morning to get them tuned to the aids. Some need more or particular types of warmup fences before going in the ring. Horses are individuals, and good training involves understanding those quirks and figuring out how to bring out each animal’s best performance. In my experience, a big part of what the best trainers and programs excel at is understanding the animals and developing the right program to allow each one to succeed.
All of the above are different from employing extreme exhaustion, illegal drugs, or other unethical practices like tying up heads or withdrawing water, or whatever. Those things are deplorable and people who employ them should not have customers.
- I think there is a real problem with our sport, and it’s one that doesn’t have a simple solution. I’ve said this before, but the kind of extraordinary athlete needed to be a top hunter or equitation horse rarely also comes with the kind of deadhead disposition that is needed to perform quietly and consistently in all venues.
In the case of equitation, the package is even more complex and hard to find, because the winner needs to be a great athlete, extremely well trained, and extremely sound. Modern equitation courses ask riders and horses to answer extremely technical questions over varied fences using invisible aids. I agree with the editorial that the best equitation horses really need to have no (or at least very few) opinions. I had one like this: He was extremely quiet and extremely obedient, and happy to add a stride or leave it out, or jump a spooky jump from a blind approach, or countercanter a tight turn, or ignore flashing lights or echoes from a stadium crowd cheering. He performed his best with a 20-minute flat session in the mornings before he showed to be at his most focused and responsive (his “prep”). I fully recognize that I was extremely lucky.
The solution to this problem is not (or at least not mostly) about changing the judging standards. As many posters have said, the horse and rider combination that performs perfectly and answers all the course’s questions appropriately should be the winner. The question is what do you do about the horse that has one part of the package and not the other. Sometimes, good training is the answer. Sometimes, it is a different (legitimate) preparation routine. But sometimes, people end up with extremely talented and expensive and well-trained horses who do not have the right brains for their jobs. And that’s a very hard situation for owners and professionals to face. Cheating and abuse is not the right answer. But I think identifying the real problem and experiencing some empathy for the people facing it would help this conversation.
A+ touchstone. You expressed what I’ve been thinking very well.
Wow Touchstone…thank you for that. Very well-said!
[QUOTE=ynl063w;8649799]
If it had been showing as a small, then it hadn’t shown over 2’6" and should have been eligible to show medium green under the normal rules.[/QUOTE]
Depends how long ago it was. When I was a junior smalls showed at 2’6" and there was no medium division, nor was there a green division for ponies. This was in the 60s and at least through the early 70s.
[QUOTE=541hunter;8650317]
A+ touchstone. You expressed what I’ve been thinking very well.[/QUOTE]
Me, too. He/she saved me from typing out a rather long response that more than likely falls on deaf ears.
Horses that meet or exceed the “standard” are difficult to breed/find in any discipline. That’s why they’re very very expensive to buy off the rack.
I’ve often said the drug problem has been around for as long as I have at least, and that’s a VERY long time. Until you slap a trainer, owner and rider down immediately and for a VERY long time, it won’t change. It has to hurt, hurt badly and have a strong economic impact to the trainer’s bottom line.
I don’t think the USEF (formerly the AHSA) has ever been that concerned about it. If it were, the problem would be solved by now. The USEF will never, ever fix this. Every year about this time, the outrage starts and we get lip service from our wonderful governing body.
I recently returned from a show where one trainer had nearly 2 tents of horses. Please tell me how each individual horse can get the prep (whatever that is) it needs with that many horses to get to the ring each day. It’s a no-brainer to see why some trainers resort to self-help.
[QUOTE=BAC;8650478]
Depends how long ago it was. When I was a junior smalls showed at 2’6" and there was no medium division, nor was there a green division for ponies. This was in the 60s and at least through the early 70s.[/QUOTE]
Considering that findeight stated that the show we are talking about took place in the 90s or maybe a little later, I think it’s safe to assume that the show did not take place in the 60s to early 70s and that small ponies were jumping 2’3".
[QUOTE=Go Fish;8650483]
I recently returned from a show where one trainer had nearly 2 tents of horses. Please tell me how each individual horse can get the prep (whatever that is) it needs with that many horses to get to the ring each day. It’s a no-brainer to see why some trainers resort to self-help.[/QUOTE]
As someone who has been a WS for a big barn and out hacking horses at 0-dark-30, if you are that big of an operation, you hire enough staff to get it done.
There were also plenty of junior riders (myself included) willing to work for some extra saddle time on nice horses even if it was just a 20 min hack in the ring or on an off afternoon to keep the horses loose, happy, and sane. Maybe that is not the case anymore?
[QUOTE=IPEsq;8650525]
As someone who has been a WS for a big barn and out hacking horses at 0-dark-30, if you are that big of an operation, you hire enough staff to get it done.
There were also plenty of junior riders (myself included) willing to work for some extra saddle time on nice horses even if it was just a 20 min hack in the ring or on an off afternoon to keep the horses loose, happy, and sane. Maybe that is not the case anymore?[/QUOTE]
Not all WS or junior riders are created equal. And, that hack or lunge at the crack of dawn does nothing to take the edge of an Adult or Children’s hunter that goes into the ring at 3:00pm.
I also don’t think that any barn has enough WS or junior riders to hack or lunge adequately 50+ horses per day.
I will agree however, with other posters on this thread, that there ARE many programs on the big circuits that play by the book. Like with anything nefarious, you hear about the exceptions big time and a big hoohoo is made when they get caught. The fact is, those running clean programs have no reason to say a word.
The crack of dawn hacks I mentioned were generally for the horses that showed in the first divisions. However, some horses, like my junior hunter, just needed a 20 min hack in the ring in the morning no matter when he showed.
As a WS or ride-hungry junior, I averaged riding 6 horses a day and that was usually on top of riding my own horse(s) on days I had classes and, when a WS, also doing the mucking and grooming tasks. I’ve ridden with bigger barns that had a groom or WS assigned to every 3-4 horses. I think that provides enough bodies that even if only half of them are skilled enough to properly longe/ride or have the time on a given day (i.e., not spending too many hours just standing at the ring), then you have enough people, on top of the willing to work juniors to get it done. It doesn’t take a genius trainer to match up pairs adequately and for the worker to learn what that horse’s routine is. A work routine is no harder to remember than how many CCs of whatever substance.
Totally disagree with this statement. When my daughter was showing there were usually about a 1 to 4 ratio of grooms to horses.
Not all horses are showing at the same time (and the horses would generally be assigned so that the grooms jobs were spread out during the day, or if one groom had two horses going at the same time, someone else usually helped out and pitched in). Last thing the trainers did at night was write down everyone’s class on our big show board and what they needed (braiding, fake tail etc) and if they needed a lunge/hack and at what time.
Not all horses get worked/lunged every day, especially day four of a horse show when the horse has shown all week.
Some never got lunged and some never were hacked the morning of. It really depends on the individuals.
It would be very rare that one trainer would be in charge of 50 horses without brining an assistant trainer/working student etc and I’d guess for 50 that there were at least three capable riders and a lot of grooms who were able to lunge horses.
Schooling day was generally the craziest day for our barns (we rode with a couple different ones) and it didn’t really matter if horses were a little fresh. That’s why we were schooling them. The riders generally went from horse to horse on those days and the grooms brought them back and forth to the ring. Without a set schedule and trainer conflicts (no classes on schooling days) you can get through a lot of horses fairly efficiently if you’re organized.
Keep in mind too that some amateurs and juniors want to hack their own horses and travel the circuit (home school etc) so from what I’ve seen there are usually not a shortage of riders able to hack horses.
[QUOTE=touchstone-;8650240]
A few quick thoughts here: …
- There seems to be a lot of broad disapproval of any kind of preparation for the show ring as bad. That seems crazy to me. Not every horse is going to walk out of its stall or trailer and into the show ring at its best, no matter how suitable or well-trained. …
An important part of good horsemanship is figuring out what each particular horse needs … In my experience, a big part of what the best trainers and programs excel at is understanding the animals and developing the right program to allow each one to succeed.
All of the above are different from employing extreme exhaustion, illegal drugs, or other unethical practices like tying up …
- I think there is a real problem with our sport, and it’s one that doesn’t have a simple solution. I’ve said this before, but the kind of extraordinary athlete needed to be a top hunter or equitation horse rarely also comes with the kind of deadhead disposition that is needed to perform quietly and consistently in all venues. …
The question is what do you do about the horse that has one part of the package and not the other. Sometimes, good training is the answer. Sometimes, it is a different (legitimate) preparation routine. But sometimes, people end up with extremely talented and expensive and well-trained horses who do not have the right brains for their jobs. And that’s a very hard situation for owners and professionals to face. Cheating and abuse is not the right answer. But I think identifying the real problem and experiencing some empathy for the people facing it would help this conversation.[/QUOTE]
Touchstone - so much to agree with here. It’s the last part that is truly the issue. It’s always harder to do the right thing when all the ingredients but the brain are there and the money spent. We keep seeing what might be but sometimes never will be without drugs or other abusive measures. My parents, long gone, would say that that is when people show who they really are.
[QUOTE=juststartingout;8653734]
Touchstone - so much to agree with here. It’s the last part that is truly the issue. It’s always harder to do the right thing when all the ingredients but the brain are there and the money spent. We keep seeing what might be but sometimes never will be without drugs or other abusive measures. My parents, long gone, would say that that is when people show who they really are.[/QUOTE]
I have to agree. This hits close to home. I had a stunning horse in the 90s - three incredible gaits, and a jump that had to be seen to be believed. But one BNT in a clinic I rode in called him (correctly) a heartbreaker. He just didn’t have the brain for the 3’6. All the talent in the world, but he just didn’t think he could do it.
We tried him in the first years, and at the second show, my trainer just rode him out of the ring on a loose rein after he stopped out. She told me he just wasn’t going to be that horse. That same show, I had friends telling me to get another horse so I could show the AOs, which had been the goal.
My response, was to stop showing. I loved this horse, quirky as he was, and he continued to teach me a lot. And I enjoyed him until the day he died. I’ve always been grateful to my trainer who knew that he just didn’t have the brain for the job, although he sure had all the other pieces. And she didn’t try to make a square peg fit a round hole.
[QUOTE=Thoroughbred1201;8657207]
My response, was to stop showing. I loved this horse, quirky as he was, and he continued to teach me a lot. And I enjoyed him until the day he died. I’ve always been grateful to my trainer who knew that he just didn’t have the brain for the job, although he sure had all the other pieces. And she didn’t try to make a square peg fit a round hole.[/QUOTE]
As juststartingout put it, you showed who you really were.
I have a lot of sympathy for you–he does sound like a “heartbreaker”–but also a lot of admiration.
Sometimes, you can do everything perfectly, and the horse just isn’t quite right for the job. That’s a really hard thing about our sport. And something that I think some people across the spectrum–those saying “just train your horse,” and those willing to reach for a syringe–want to avoid confronting.
[QUOTE=touchstone-;8657314]
As juststartingout put it, you showed who you really were.
I have a lot of sympathy for you–he does sound like a “heartbreaker”–but also a lot of admiration.
Sometimes, you can do everything perfectly, and the horse just isn’t quite right for the job. That’s a really hard thing about our sport. And something that I think some people across the spectrum–those saying “just train your horse,” and those willing to reach for a syringe–want to avoid confronting.[/QUOTE]
Thanks. It was a tough one, no doubt. But I really enjoyed him at home, and he turned into a wonderful guy for my mom to hack as the years went on. He gained two blanket sizes when we stopped showing. Shows what tension (or lack of it) can do for a horse.
In the end, for me, it is just about the horses. I loved showing, but not enough to sell my horse. I often thought about what would have happened to him. Another trainer was sure to think that they could get it out of him, and so he would have been passed down the line.
There are wonderful people in the show world; people who really love and care about their horses. But when big business takes precedence, some really ugly things can happen. I think you just have to like the journey - win or lose. And if you don’t, and are one of those who just wants to show and win, then you’re probably in the wrong sport.
Again…Ace nor any other other tranquilizing drug will ever be legalized by USEF no matter how many hunter trainers wish for it to be so.
It won’t happen. Period.
Are these trainers really so insulated that don’t understand what being affiliated with USEF entails? USHJA judges don’t get it? 
The FEI doesn’t allow national federations to play on the world stage if they condone drugging horses. USEF is our NF. USEF can’t make rules allowing the drugging of horses while the FEI is testing for those drugs and suspending people for using them.
It boggles the mind to think that any trainer even thinks about this out loud.
[QUOTE=Thoroughbred1201;8657328]
Thanks. It was a tough one, no doubt. But I really enjoyed him at home, and he turned into a wonderful guy for my mom to hack as the years went on. He gained two blanket sizes when we stopped showing. Shows what tension (or lack of it) can do for a horse.
In the end, for me, it is just about the horses. I loved showing, but not enough to sell my horse. I often thought about what would have happened to him. Another trainer was sure to think that they could get it out of him, and so he would have been passed down the line.
There are wonderful people in the show world; people who really love and care about their horses. But when big business takes precedence, some really ugly things can happen. I think you just have to like the journey - win or lose. And if you don’t, and are one of those who just wants to show and win, then you’re probably in the wrong sport.[/QUOTE]
Bingo! And I think we’ve all had those horses. I know I’ve had several. Sometimes you just have to enjoy them for what and who they are.
FEI doesn’t give a rats hind end about Hunters, Eq or most of the US Jumper community, after the recent Endurance debacle that has been allowed to go on and on for years? I wouldn’t hold them up as the guardian of horse welfare and enforcement of standards outside their rated competitions or threat to USEF.
Vast majority of people who go to shows in this country don’t know who or what FEI is and never ride in an FEI rated competition since FEI has nothing to do with their disciplne and/or any shows they attend.
