the ones that were “supposed” to impress me the most were usually the ones who left me feeling the most “blah”.
and that is most likely because you could not ride them correctly. Believe me…I have been there…once you LEARN from them, you will be enlightened.:yes:
[QUOTE=Bogey2;2937363]
and that is most likely because you could not ride them correctly. Believe me…I have been there…once you LEARN from them, you will be enlightened.:yes:[/QUOTE]
Oh boy, now you’ve gone off the deep end. :eek::eek::eek: That’s like saying people only ride dressage because they don’t know how to jump! :lol:
Really, it shouldn’t be so hard to accept differences!
[QUOTE=siegi b.;2937336]
Canticle - you will never be a Grand Prix dressage rider, so why are you even arguing?[/QUOTE]
And you will never be in the Olympics, but how is any of this relevant??? 
The relevance comes into play when you talk about “your kind of horse breed” vs. Cindy’s kind… Her goal was Grand Prix and the Olympics, your’s obviously is not.
I don’t understand why this article has had such a reaction from some people. If I read a viewpoint in a magazine that I disagreed with , at most, it might cause me to roll my eyes before moving on to the next page.
If you are confident and happy with your choices and preferences, an article like this really should not bother you so much, should it?
ha ha siegi, remember the advice you gave me earlier. it’s no use trying to talk to a know-nothing know-it-all.
canticle, you should print an article on why Ms. Sydnor’s advice was so off base… make sure to put your experiences in it.
siegi b, I will take that advice you gave class…to go please!:winkgrin:
[QUOTE=Sandy M;2936242]
Do you not think that if someone could AFFORD a $20K to $50K horse, they would have already purchased it???
I disagree with the above statement. I could afford a $20K to $50K horse without going into debt and never have purchased one. Many boarders at the barn I used to board at would judge me for not buying a fancy WB or schoolmaster knowing that I surely could. I was always being approached with a sales line trying to entice me to buy an expensive horse. I never have. I never judged others for going into debt purchasing expensive horses but I certainly drew criticism for riding my OTTB and not upgrading. The barn owners would always show me new imports and have me ride them expecting me to be so enthralled with a high-end horse that I would certainly purchase. Never happened. Only now, am I considering it. Ironically, not for myself, but for my daughter. If a person has to go into debt to buy a horse that completely satisfies them, I support that. Passion is priceless.
[QUOTE=Bogey2;2937205]
Sandy and Canticle, have you ever ridden a really nice mover? Have you been on a well trained upper level horse? They really can teach you a LOT more than an average horse. I know, I have been there…and am still taking the journey. I bought a weanling because that is all I could afford for my future …hopefully…Grand Prix horse. I have a 22 year-old schoolmaster I bought 6 years ago, for a damn good price and work hard to keep him sound. HE is the one that made me realize how much I was missing in my training riding a horse with gaits that were not well suited for dressage.
I never suggest that anyone spend more than they can afford on a horse…but a few of them have saved up an extra year or two so they could afford the quality they wanted.
Lastly, I do not know Ms. Sydnor personally, but I do know of her reputation and I think you have read way too much in to the article.
I am going to go pop open a beer, and grab a bag of popcorn now!:lol:[/QUOTE]
Bogey, I know exactly what you are talking about. I think, like me, there are a lot of adult amateurs out there that (once they’ve developed a decent seat/riding skills) given the opportunity to sit on a horse with the gaits and movement more “suitable” for dressage – and the bonus of training – would understand what Cindy is talking about. (Again, to be clear, dressage CAN improve any horse, but after a certain point, IF your horse finds it more difficult to do the same dance routine as your goal – or the horse can, but the two of you are not a good match, it’s time to move on.) I’m grateful for the trainers and friends who let me sit on their horses so I could learn…and then I could make an informed decision about how I wanted to continue on the “journey.”
If after someone has had such an opportunity to ride such a horse and it doesn’t float his/her boat, so be it. It’s their decision. I, for one, want to get on with the other part of the journey (Grand Prix). That way, I can bring my youngsters along even more correctly, effectively and efficiently. I’ve felt the difference, and so…that’s the boat I want to float in!
And now, rather than beer and popcorn, I’m opening the bottle of wine…
[QUOTE=class;2937397]
ha ha siegi, remember the advice you gave me earlier. it’s no use trying to talk to a know-nothing know-it-all.[/QUOTE]
Class? Or Class-less?
All of the recent “questions” to each other have been addressed on page 2 or so. Now the point seems to be to find an exception or a scenario that proves the previous poster wrong. Not just wrong, but stupid and igorant, too, especially if person A doesn’t ride dressage for the same reason that person B does. Come on!
Dang!
I got my glass of wine!
Cheers bogey2, siegi and egontoast!!!
[QUOTE=Bogey2;2937205]
Sandy and Canticle, have you ever ridden a really nice mover? Have you been on a well trained upper level horse? [/QUOTE]
Yes and yes. Many times. And my new horse, while not a WB is QUITE a nice mover. My dressage trainer thinks he is wonderful and is delighted that he is so much better a mover than my old horse, who was a flat TB type mover, though very correct and obedient. (Now if baby will only settle down and stop being a silly 3 year old…).
As someone said above, many of us would love to have a fancy moving WB, but often we have limited money, limited time, or perhaps just the emotional (and financial) investment in the horse we have, or a preference for a particular breed, whether it is bred for competitive dressage per se or not. As someone else said, many of us do dressage with the horse we have because of the love of BOTH dressage and the horse. Others do dressage because it is what they do, dressage is their total focus, and the horse is a tool (which is not to say they don’t have an emotional investment in that horse, but how many articles talk in terms of learning what you can, and then moving on to the next, better horse?). A lot of ammy riders just don’t do that. And how often have we praised on this board people who honor that relationship and for whom every horse is a “forever” horse??? But this article implies that if you have a nice, average horse, or a non-traditional breed horse, you can’t be serious about dressage and you are wasting your time if you don’t fork out for the purpose-bred WB dressage horse.
Again, yes, absolutely, Ms. Sydnor is right IF IF IF IF you are talking about being very focussed on moving up the levels, competing, winning, reaching FEI levels. No question. Gotta have the horse, and they are expensive, and the “cheap” horse that becomes a high level dressage star is the rarity. But the article did NOT restrict itself to people with those aims, and indeed, stated that one could not improve as a rider WITHOUT a fancy moving WB. That is NOT the way to encourage interest in dressage, and it is the vast numbers of ammys that support those elite riders - not a good idea to tell them to spend the money or forget about being “serious” about dressage.
[QUOTE=egontoast;2937391]
I don’t understand why this article has had such a reaction from some people. If I read a viewpoint in a magazine that I disagreed with , at most, it might cause me to roll my eyes before moving on to the next page.
If you are confident and happy with your choices and preferences, an article like this really should not bother you so much, should it?[/QUOTE]
Ego - I think the reaction is simply because this wasn’t under the “If I knew then…” personal, and related ONLY to Ms. Sydnor banner. Yes, it was posited as her personal experience, but she then extrapolated to “everyone needs to spend the money for an expensive, good moving, purpose bred dressage horse or they can’t improve as riders.” She says it’s not about winning, but then says it IS about winning - about competition, about getting that “10.” It was a straight forward editorial/article. As such, it is presumed to have the imprimatur of DT, the principal dressage magazine in this country. Ms. Sydnor is indeed a respected judge/trainer/competitor, so it is upsetting if this is reflective of the “dressage establishment’s” attitude: You can’t improve as a rider without a good moving WB, even if your ambitions fall well below FEI, and you are wasting your time on lesser horses. It also gives lie to the “dressage is about training” mantra, and is complete contradiction to the supposedly encouraging articles about doing dressage with non-traditional breeds. Indeed, rolling my eyes WAS my first reaction - how out of touch can someone be? How many shows do you think there would be for the elite if ALL the ammies riding non-traditional horses decided to take their toys and go home??
I will continue to do what I do with regard to my horses/training/dressage and continue riding my non-WB (though since he’s a combination of a HOT blood and generic (non-European WB) warmblood, I"m not sure how he’d be classed…LOL). It just discourages me that the sport and organization to which I have dedicated so much time and effort endorses a complete dismissal of those efforts because I can’t spend the money for the kind of horse they think i SHOULD have.
[QUOTE=Sandy M;2938663]
she then extrapolated to “everyone needs to spend the money for an expensive, good moving, purpose bred dressage horse or they can’t improve as riders.” [/QUOTE]
Excuse me for asking, but is that truly a direct quote/Cindy’s exact words, as the quotation marks imply?? If it is, my memory is playing tricks on me, because I do not recall her saying this at all.
Excuse me for asking, but is that truly a direct quote/Cindy’s exact words, as the quotation marks imply?? If it is, my memory is playing tricks on me, because I do not recall her saying this at all.
fish, this whole thread is full of them…join me in a glass of beer and some popcorn?:winkgrin:
[QUOTE=Bogey2;2938846]
fish, this whole thread is full of them…join me in a glass of beer and some popcorn?:winkgrin:[/QUOTE]
What’s “them”? I hope you’re referring to misattributed quotations, because if this thread’s not full of them, I need to be checked for impending dementia and definitely avoid potentially intoxicating substances!
[QUOTE=fish;2938779]
Excuse me for asking, but is that truly a direct quote/Cindy’s exact words, as the quotation marks imply?? If it is, my memory is playing tricks on me, because I do not recall her saying this at all.[/QUOTE]
No, it is not an exact quote, but it is the tenor of her article. While she says she has worked with lesser horses (and indeed, still does), her statement was to the effect that better horses make better riders (I feel better TRAINING makes better riders), and that efforts with lesser horses are wasted.
:sigh:
To sum up, several of us here have interpreted the article in very different ways.
Some have taken great offense to the article while others have not.
:sigh:
that would be it.
but she then extrapolated to “everyone needs to spend the money for an expensive, good moving, purpose bred dressage horse or they can’t improve as riders.”
Just in case anyone missed it. Despite the quotation marks, that was NOT a quote from CS.
‘Viewpoint’ like ’ What I knew then…" is an opinion piece. It’s her opinion.
She’s not speaking for any organization or committee. She’s giving a personal ‘viewpoint’. You don’t have to agree with it. This is getting repetitive.
[QUOTE=egontoast;2939021]
that would be it.
Just in case anyone missed it. Despite the quotation marks, that was NOT a quote from CS.
‘Viewpoint’ like ’ What I knew then…" is an opinion piece. It’s her opinion.
She’s not speaking for any organization or committee. She’s giving a personal ‘viewpoint’. You don’t have to agree with it. This is getting repetitive.[/QUOTE]
True… It was a paraphrase/precis…but are you really going to sit (or stand? ;0)) there and tell me that you think that that viewpoint is NOT the general attitude of many, many in the dressage “establishment”? If it were not, do you think this qualification rule business would have arisen and become such a hot button issue? All this “We need people to ride better. OMIGOD! 30% rides at 3rd level!!! We MUST make a rule to ‘protect’ dressage from these horrible people on unsuitable horses doing cringeworthy rides in the double bridle (which we permitted them to use, which they could not use before at that level)!!”
Someone started a thread on the other board asking whether anyone had actually see a 30%ride at any level - you know, all that bad riding on “unsuitable” horses that the judges are supposedly seeing. The responses were that there were few and rare, and more often related to a horsey meltdown for some reason rather than bad riding. The only 30% ride I’ve ever seen was NOT a 30% ride, it was about a 56% to 59% ride by a OTTB being shown at 1st level for the first time. The horse did an obedient test, was inconsistent in its “on the bitness,” did “eh” lenthenings at the trot. Rider sat well, was perhaps a little passive (but perhaps the horse was “hot” and needed that). She got a 38% (no errors, no blowups, on the bit MOST of the time…). In an earlier class, a WB did back flips, bucked, ran backwards through the entire test but got a 76%. Whatever. Let’s say I watch for that judge’s name and avoid shows where he/she judges.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
