Go into debt for a horse???

[Mozart]

So I have reread the article and I think people are focussing too much on the “take out a loan” option. It was one of several options, one of which was take more time and be patient in finding the right horse. My reading of the article boils down to:

“Do you want to be competitive? Are you frustrated even though you ride well? If so, find a suitable horse. You can spend a lot of time properly training and riding the unsuitable horse and find you won’t do as well as the rider on the suitable horse.”

It was her advice to the frustrated. It was made with the benefit of hindsight, what would she do over, if she had the chance. It was about suitability , not price tag.

If you are happy with your horse and your results…then why change?

[canticle]

[QUOTE=NoDQhere;2924059]
Very well said! I still don’t get all the hoopla over this article. Why is it that people are so offended if anyone even suggests that some horses just aren’t appropriate for Dressage. It happens all the time in other disciplines. Yes, Dressage means “training”, but Dressage has become a very competitive sport, and that is what, IMO, Ms. Sydnor is talking about. All she is saying is that having an appropriate horse makes everything easier.[/QUOTE]
Dressage is only a “very competitive sport” to a minute fraction of the population, and Ms. Sydnor failed to limit her audience to that segment. For 99% of the population, any sound and sane horse IS appropriate for dressage. Owning a European WB wouldn’t make anything easier for us.

If I were a Barrel Racing trainer and you came to me with, say, a super nice Morgan. Beautiful horse, excellent example of it’s breed and you love this horse. I am STILL going to tell you that your chances of winning money in Rodeos, no matter how nice this Morgan is, is pretty slim. I’m not going to tell you that you can’t barrel race with your Morgan, but you need to be realistic and as a trainer, it is my responsibility to tell you that. Not take your money, and haul you to Rodeos knowing that you are never going to be in the money. Now if all you want to do is playdays and fun shows, go for it, but if your goal is professional rodeos, get an appropriate horse.

WOW, the irony of this statement is just… I’m floored! :eek: My first horse was a Morgan, and he was a successful barrel racer when he was younger. He also jumped, did dressage, was a trail horse. You have proven precisely the point that you were trying so hard to refute. Horses are more versatile then you give them credit for, and most people want and need that versatility. Perhaps you intended to pick a different example than the Morgan?

[class]

of course dear. any horse is good enough for any sport if you have very low standards. in fact, i love racing haflingers and i love cow sorting with clydesdales and NO ONE is going to tell me that it can’t be done!!!11!

[canticle]

[QUOTE=class;2924754]
of course dear. any horse is good enough for any sport if you have very low standards. in fact, i love racing haflingers and i love cow sorting with clydesdales and NO ONE is going to tell me that it can’t be done!!!11![/QUOTE]
Ah yes, now people who disagree with you and prefer a different kind of horse have low standards? How juvenile.

[Sandy_M]

[QUOTE=canticle;2924982]
Ah yes, now people who disagree with you and prefer a different kind of horse have low standards? How juvenile. [/QUOTE]

And, of course, such a snide remark (the one to which Canticle was replying) totally bypasses the fact that not every Warmblood is going to knock your socks off as a dressage horse. Spending big bucks does not guarantee success. Yes, your odds are probably better that a $50,000 WB will “outperform” (depending upon how you define the “performance”) a $2,200 App/TB or ClydeX, but I’ve seen enough expensive, beautifully moving horses who were mentally unfit or unhappy with being dressage horses, and any number of TBX, TBs, Apps, Appendix QH, Morgans, Arabs, etc. that happily tooled down the center line a received GOOD scores at anything from Training Level to Grand Prix. Not every WB, not every non-WB, is going to make it all the way from Intro to GP, but MOST can do a decent job up to 2nd/3rd/4th level, and for the average ammy that’s quite enough, without mortgaging the farm to “do dressage” and have a little fun showing, and one can still have “high standards” for performance on such a horse - maybe not HIGH PERFORMANCE as in “I’m going to the Olympics,” but correct riding and training to whatever level the horse is capable.

Betsy Steiner, or some such columnist in COTH (sorry, can’t remember if it was she, but I think it was) particulary commented on a horse that she either had owned or judged (again, memory going…) at a Young Horses competition. Fantastic mover, gorgeous!!, etc. Can you imagine what he probably sold for? But when he got to 2nd level and collection, that gorgeous movement was too difficult for him to easily collect - and he didn’t WANT to - and was happily sold on to be a hunter. So… wouldn’t it have been fun to be the ammy who paid big bucks for that high quality horse, WAS able to ride the gaits - only to find out the big bucks WB doesn’t WANT to do dressage? One hopes that he sold for as much as a hunter PROSPECT as he did as a dressage Young Horse winner. Probably did. But what if he hadn’t “wanted” to be a hunter, either?

[NoDQhere]

[QUOTE=canticle;2924732]
Dressage is only a “very competitive sport” to a minute fraction of the population, and Ms. Sydnor failed to limit her audience to that segment. For 99% of the population, any sound and sane horse IS appropriate for dressage. Owning a European WB wouldn’t make anything easier for us.

WOW, the irony of this statement is just… I’m floored! :eek: My first horse was a Morgan, and he was a successful barrel racer when he was younger. He also jumped, did dressage, was a trail horse. You have proven precisely the point that you were trying so hard to refute. Horses are more versatile then you give them credit for, and most people want and need that versatility. Perhaps you intended to pick a different example than the Morgan?[/QUOTE]

Did you actually read my post?? Perhaps you need to reread it! My point was that any horse can barrel race but that to win at the “professional” level, the Morgan (or whatever alternative breed) isn’t going to cut it. I grew up with Appaloosas and had some really nice ones. Appys are well known for their versatality. Several of them probably could have made it to FEI. But that is not what they were bred for or “shaped” for. And yes, most horses are versatile, BUT versatality is not what gets a horse “up the levels”.

No one is forcing anyone to take out a loan to buy a Warmblood. I am just flabbergasted that a few folk are so “over the top” offended by the suggestion that not ALL horses are wonderfully suited for Dressage.

[Eclectic_Horseman]

@NoDQhere;2925134

Did you actually read my post?? Perhaps you need to reread it! My point was that any horse can barrel race but that to win at the “professional” level, the Morgan (or whatever alternative breed) isn’t going to cut it. I grew up with Appaloosas and had some really nice ones. Appys are well known for their versatality. Several of them probably could have made it to FEI. But that is not what they were bred for or “shaped” for. And yes, most horses are versatile, BUT versatality is not what gets a horse “up the levels”.

No one is forcing anyone to take out a loan to buy a Warmblood. I am just flabbergasted that a few folk are so “over the top” offended by the suggestion that not ALL horses are wonderfully suited for Dressage.

I’m not offended by that. I AM offended by the suggestion that apparently according to Ms. Sydnor a horse is suitable for any and every rider just because he is high priced. :eek:

The “suitability” of the horse that I have been referring to–and which Ms. Sydnor did NOT mention at all-- is the suitability of the horse FOR THE PARTICULAR RIDER, not the suitability of the horse for the sport of dressage.

Beginners and intermediate amateur riders are very ill served by advice in a national magazine telling them to spend $20k-$50k for a “good” horse to learn on in order to be a “better rider.” No mention that horses in the lower end of that range that are “bred for dressage” are usually 3-4 year olds that are not at all suitable for many, if not most, riders. :no:

Advice like that keeps the trainers and breeders in business though!

[dkcbr]

It is patently obvious that some of us will read the article in defensive mode, and some will take it for what it is: an editorial from one person based on that one person’s life experience.

It is hardly “advice” to spend x number of dollars to buy y quality of horse to do z activity.

Each of us defines “Dressage” differently, and each of us has different goals for ourselves and our horses. And, as I posted some time back, don’t take this article - or any other article - as an instruction manual for living your life. If you don’t find anything applicable to you personally, so be it! :yes: And trust that MOST of us have enough common sense to do the same!

[TBPNW]

The average rider I’m in contact with definately wants the warmblood, but can only afford to spend so much. This price range leaves them looking at youngsters. I don’t know when dressage riders became experts on working with youngsters, but a lot of people seem “forced” into buying them as if it was their only option. Maybe in that case if they truly wanted a well matched warmblood, they should be taking out a loan for more buying power. It’s funny, suggesting to take out a rather large loan for what to most is a hobby doesn’t sound like something to which many people could relate. Let alone the fickleness of the economy, not many people are that independent. They likely have a family and many other obligations that come before their hobby. Going into debt might not sit well on principle with people. I know because I’m horribly debt intolerant. There are the “good” loans and investments can offset loans, but what I imagined were people getting “it’s the only way” type of loan for a horse, so my knee jerk reaction to the advice was to wince.

[Sithly]

[QUOTE=Sandy M;2925023]
And, of course, such a snide remark (the one to which Canticle was replying) totally bypasses the fact that not every Warmblood is going to knock your socks off as a dressage horse. Spending big bucks does not guarantee success. Yes, your odds are probably better that a $50,000 WB will “outperform” (depending upon how you define the “performance”) a $2,200 App/TB or ClydeX, but I’ve seen enough expensive, beautifully moving horses who were mentally unfit or unhappy with being dressage horses, and any number of TBX, TBs, Apps, Appendix QH, Morgans, Arabs, etc. that happily tooled down the center line a received GOOD scores at anything from Training Level to Grand Prix. Not every WB, not every non-WB, is going to make it all the way from Intro to GP, but MOST can do a decent job up to 2nd/3rd/4th level, and for the average ammy that’s quite enough, without mortgaging the farm to “do dressage” and have a little fun showing, and one can still have “high standards” for performance on such a horse - maybe not HIGH PERFORMANCE as in “I’m going to the Olympics,” but correct riding and training to whatever level the horse is capable. [/QUOTE]

Stop being so reasonable. You’re spoiling the trainwreck.

:lol:

[canticle]

[QUOTE=NoDQhere;2925134]
No one is forcing anyone to take out a loan to buy a Warmblood. I am just flabbergasted that a few folk are so “over the top” offended by the suggestion that not ALL horses are wonderfully suited for Dressage.[/QUOTE]
Non-WBs are “inappropriate” or “unsuitable” for like 1% of the riding population. The remaining 99% of us are doing just fine! Why does this bother you so much? There will always be a market for your type of horse, even without you trying to convince us that we are wasting our time, have low standards, or would be a better riders if we switched breeds.

Choose your favorite breed or type and have fun with it! But please stop trying to scare the rest of us into giving up ours! :no:

[inca]

By “riding population” you must be including ALL disciplines because I promise you that 99% of the dressage riders do not ride non-WBs. And I think what people are referring to here are dressage horses and dressage riders.

There are certainly individual non-WBs that are well-suited to dressage, up to and including Grand Prix. But there are many more non-WBs that are not suited to more than lower level dressage. And if that is what you enjoy, more power to you. But, don’t try to convince the world that, as a whole, non-WBs are as successful as WBs at upper level dressage. It’s just not true. Yes, there are individual horses that are non-WBs that are better at it than some individual WBs. But, if you look at breeds as a whole, WBs are bred for dressage and other breeds are not.

If I decide tomorrow that I want to compete in cutting, trust me, I WILL be looking for another horse and that horse will most likely be a QH. I’m not going to take my 16.3hh lovely moving WB and turn her into a cutting horse. And I am not going to go look at Clydesdales when I know I want to compete in cutting. I will find a horse that is MOST SUITABLE to be a competitive cutting horse and most of the time that would be a QH.

[canticle]

[QUOTE=inca;2925991]
By “riding population” you must be including ALL disciplines because I promise you that 99% of the dressage riders do not ride non-WBs. And I think what people are referring to here are dressage horses and dressage riders.

There are certainly individual non-WBs that are well-suited to dressage, up to and including Grand Prix. But there are many more non-WBs that are not suited to more than lower level dressage. And if that is what you enjoy, more power to you. But, don’t try to convince the world that, as a whole, non-WBs are as successful as WBs at upper level dressage. It’s just not true. Yes, there are individual horses that are non-WBs that are better at it than some individual WBs. But, if you look at breeds as a whole, WBs are bred for dressage and other breeds are not.[/QUOTE]No one is saying WBs aren’t good at showing. We are just tired of the Ms. Sydnors telling us to switch breeds. Imagine if you, who are perfectly happy with your horses, were constantly told to switch breeds! Think how annoying it would get! If we change our minds and want WBs, we know where to find them, thanks! :winkgrin:

If I decide tomorrow that I want to compete in cutting, trust me, I WILL be looking for another horse and that horse will most likely be a QH. I’m not going to take my 16.3hh lovely moving WB and turn her into a cutting horse. And I am not going to go look at Clydesdales when I know I want to compete in cutting. I will find a horse that is MOST SUITABLE to be a competitive cutting horse and most of the time that would be a QH.

If you wanted to do cutting for fun I don’t know why your WB couldn’t do it. You don’t need to buy a new horse whenever you want to try something new.

Ms. Sydnor failed to limit her audience to those who want to be world-class (a VERY small percentage, I can assure you). Most people want to just have fun and enjoy the horse they already have. If dressage is not a good discipline for improving one’s horse and having a good time, let’s just come right out and say it so those of us involved in the discipline under mistaken pretenses can move on to better things.

[inca]

If you wanted to do cutting for fun I don’t know why your WB couldn’t do it. You don’t need to buy a new horse whenever you want to try something new.

But I specified COMPETING. Yes, you can do almost any discipline “for fun” on almost any horse. But if you want to be COMPETITVE in any discipline, you should get a horse that is SUITABLE (in confirmation, gaits and temperament) for that particular discipline. That is the point. WBs are bred to be suitable for dressage and other breeds are not. Again, taking note that we are talking about the breeds as a whole. There are always individual horses that are exceptions.

[canticle]

[QUOTE=inca;2926131]
WBs are bred to be suitable for dressage and other breeds are not.[/QUOTE]
This is a whole other kettle of fish! I think all we conclude is that they do better in competition based on the standards that are currently in place. And no one is denying that. :yes: But are they most suitable for dressage in general? I’m not convinced. That’s why Ms. Sydnor should have been more careful to limit her statements to those who wish to compete at the highest levels. Everyone else already has their favorite breeds and doesn’t need her help in deciding what type of horse to buy.

[siegi_b]

Canticle - the flaw in your argument is that you’re trying to make Cindy’s article about yourself. Believe me when I say it isn’t…

Cindy never said for you to get rid of your Morgan or whatever and to then go into debt to purchase a warmblood.

However, she pretty succinctly stated that IF you WANT to be competitive and advance in dressage, HER EXPERIENCE has taught her that it’s best to go ahead and spend as much money as is feasible on getting a talented horse that can help take you there.

I don’t quite understand how you can interpret that statement to mean that you should get rid of your Morgan and/or that the only horse worth having is a warmblood. That’s pretty far-fetched, don’t you think?

And then you wanted Cindy to preface the article by saying that it only addresses ambitious dressage riders with lots of money and high goals? Why? Would that have kept you from reading it? Would your conclusion then have been that Cindy is elitist by only addressing that 1 or 2% of people that can afford or a willing to follow her experience?

As you can see things can get pretty ridiculous when you continue to think that everything anybody writes that has to do with horses is about you and your situation. Let me assure you again… it isn’t and it won’t be.

[Sandy_M]

@siegi b.;2926619

However, she pretty succinctly stated that IF you WANT to be competitive and advance in dressage, HER EXPERIENCE has taught her that it’s best to go ahead and spend as much money as is feasible on getting a talented horse that can help take you there.

BUT she did NOT say THAT. While there was a passing reference to “competitive”, etc., she did specifically state that EVEN IF YOU WERE NOT COMPETITIVE AND SHOWING you NEEDED a good horse - an expensive horse - if you wanted to become a good rider. That may not have been her intention, but that’s what she said. The fault may be in the editing, but indeed, she did NOT limit her comments to those whose main goal in riding is to be extremely competitive and go “all the way.”

[NoDQhere]

[QUOTE=canticle;2926146]
This is a whole other kettle of fish! I think all we conclude is that they do better in competition based on the standards that are currently in place. And no one is denying that. :yes: But are they most suitable for dressage in general? I’m not convinced. That’s why Ms. Sydnor should have been more careful to limit her statements to those who wish to compete at the highest levels. Everyone else already has their favorite breeds and doesn’t need her help in deciding what type of horse to buy.[/QUOTE]

Allrightythen. You do understand, don’t you, that when someone writes an article like Ms. Sydnor did, that it is just that. An article. Just suggestions, based on her experience. Not a new “law”. No one is forcing you to even read the article, let alone follow her advice.

Over many years of working with people who want to do the “english” disciplines, we have seen too many people just give up because the horse they chose was not suitable. These are people who are then lost to our sport. In our area they go back to rodeo. The people who have stuck with Dressage have ended up getting a more suitable horse. And, NO, we haven’t sold them one. We encourage “beginners” to get a “schoolmaster” type of horse and we mostly have young horses.

We aren’t independently wealthy enough to just “have fun with our horses” anymore than the average person is independently wealthy enough to go into debt for a horse. We love our horses very much and they give us more enjoyment than most people can understand. But we also have to succeed, and I don’t think that is a crime either.:lol:

[canticle]

[QUOTE=siegi b.;2926619]
Canticle - the flaw in your argument is that you’re trying to make Cindy’s article about yourself. Believe me when I say it isn’t…[/QUOTE]
Who is the intended audience of the article then? She never says, so I can only assume that she meant anyone who happened to be reading.

Cindy never said for you to get rid of your Morgan or whatever and to then go into debt to purchase a warmblood.

However, she pretty succinctly stated that IF you WANT to be competitive and advance in dressage, HER EXPERIENCE has taught her that it’s best to go ahead and spend as much money as is feasible on getting a talented horse that can help take you there.

I don’t quite understand how you can interpret that statement to mean that you should get rid of your Morgan and/or that the only horse worth having is a warmblood. That’s pretty far-fetched, don’t you think?

My first horse (the ex-barrel racer :eek:) was the Morgan but sadly he has passed on. Cindy would say the time spent with him could have been better spent with a different horse, and that I would be a better rider now if I had chosen her preferred breed instead. Where does she get off saying this BS? That’s what I want to know. :mad:

And then you wanted Cindy to preface the article by saying that it only addresses ambitious dressage riders with lots of money and high goals? Why? Would that have kept you from reading it? Would your conclusion then have been that Cindy is elitist by only addressing that 1 or 2% of people that can afford or a willing to follow her experience?

As you can see things can get pretty ridiculous when you continue to think that everything anybody writes that has to do with horses is about you and your situation. Let me assure you again… it isn’t and it won’t be.

Her “advice” was only applicable to 1-2% of dressage riders, so yes she should have let us know ahead of time. Her opinions were worthless to the vast majority of riders, and I’d be willing to wager that those who would care already know all that she’s said.

She should stick to writing training articles, or whatever it is that she’s good at.

[canticle]

[QUOTE=NoDQhere;2926640]
Allrightythen. You do understand, don’t you, that when someone writes an article like Ms. Sydnor did, that it is just that. An article. Just suggestions, based on her experience. Not a new “law”. No one is forcing you to even read the article, let alone follow her advice.[/QUOTE]
It was an opinion piece, so shouldn’t we be encouraged to discuss it?

Over many years of working with people who want to do the “english” disciplines, we have seen too many people just give up because the horse they chose was not suitable. These are people who are then lost to our sport. In our area they go back to rodeo. The people who have stuck with Dressage have ended up getting a more suitable horse. And, NO, we haven’t sold them one. We encourage “beginners” to get a “schoolmaster” type of horse and we mostly have young horses.

If the type of dressage you do requires such an extreme type of horse that nearly all horses are “unsuitable,” then yes IMO it is better that people go back to their old disciplines with the horses they already have. The type of dressage we do is much more welcoming than that and embraces all horses of sound mind and body. Our horse is the constant, and we use dressage merely as a tool to advance it. We could never imagine selling our horse just for the sake of a silly little training tool. That would be like trading in your dog because someone gave you a new leash.

There is room for all of us in dressage, and DT has both types of subscribers. But Sydnor seems blissfully unaware that the other type exists.

We aren’t independently wealthy enough to just “have fun with our horses” anymore than the average person is independently wealthy enough to go into debt for a horse. We love our horses very much and they give us more enjoyment than most people can understand. But we also have to succeed, and I don’t think that is a crime either.:lol:

At least you admit that your biases, that you need to promote your preferred breeds for financial reasons. But Ms. Sydnor was pretending to be a trainer, and now we realize that she’s just a horse trader? That type of conflict of interest should come with a disclaimer!