Hunter Myths - Spin-off of the Left Sided Mane - UPDATE: ARTICLE IS OUT!

[TheMoo]

@greysfordays

I kind of think the minutia about turnout is much more about how a rider feels in the schooling ring and the in-gate than what the judge is looking for. The judge wants 8 beautiful jumps, a lovely and healthy horse and some coordinated lead changes. That you’re in a Jimmy’s bridle with the older diamond stitching is nice and all, but it’s not going to forgive any mistakes in the ring.

I did the hunters for 4 years here in CA on the AA circuits and found the whole atmosphere in the warm ups and by the in-gate kind of intimidating, especially when I started doing the AOs. The BNT’s totally undress you and your horse’s turnout. So for me, getting the “right” tack was like putting on armor. I felt it made my horse look beautiful and it made me feel more confident. Plus it was fun learning about the craftsmanship that goes into good tack. No one was harmed in my shallow endeavors, save my pocket book.

But look, just bc I got really into the details of turnout doesn’t mean I couldn’t tell you why my horse was in a certain type of bit or why we schooled in something different at home or any other horse care related question. I stayed engaged and involved in all of it.

And I never EVER imagined that I had to get a wide noseband bridle to replace the narrower one, or the judge would notice my horse’s suitcase head. No judge could miss that head :lol:. But they also noticed he was a beautiful mover and lofty jumper and when I got my ish together to find the jumps, we were rewarded.

As for the pelham, honestly, I think in a flat class, it should be taken into consideration. In a jumping class, there is so much more data (found all the jumps, lead changes, the form over the jumps, the movement across the ground) than in in a flat class, plus you have all the horses with each other to make direct comparisons. That the horse has a pelham sort of fades away in a beautiful jumping round, which is why I think you see them in derby’s fairly often. In a flat class, it’s harder to get that beautiful stretch over the back picture you can get in a snaffle. You can, but the picture isn’t quite the same, and most times I’ve seen a horse flat in a pelham, the neck is more contracted and you get more of an impression of tension. These are sweeping generalizations I know, but I don’t think it’s unforgivable to note it as a judge in a flat class.

And really, for all the folks crowing about how unfair and political and shabby the hunter ring is, just don’t show in it. There’s no need to shame folks who love that ring, as long as they’re taking care of their horses, I don’t see why we need to make anyone feel bad about the thing they love.

I love your entire post. That being said, fellow riders shouldn’t sneer at someone because of tradition. This sport is very subjective.

My feeling on this thread has been non-judges alluding to riders looking sideways at people for braiding on the left or black tack or whatever. I personally would never show my horse in a girth that wasn’t all leather unless there was a physical reason not to. That’s one of my things. I wouldn’t make judgy faces or comment on it because that is MY preference and mine alone.

Judges prefer a certain way of going. That’s fine. Trainers can have whatever turnout rules they want. That’s also fine. It would just be nice if people would come off as helpful rather than dramatic criticism.

[PintoPony]

RugBug, I love that photo of teenage you! Your turnout looks like what most kids had on the local show circut when I was a teen. And from the look of that collection of ribbons, I’d say you did quite well!

My coat was very close in color to yours but it was pinstriped, and I had light grey breeches. Saddle and bridle didn’t match but both were a shade of brown. Add a bay pinto hony with a black/white mane and braids that looked like I did them with one hand, in the dark, lol! But I loved that horse, worked hard for everything I had and had the best time going to those shows.

[IPEsq]

I really like a pelham for a horse that goes well in one. I’d much rather ride a horse who likes a simple Tom Thumb pelham than have one that needs a bicycle chain in its mouth disguised by that hunter Dee.

[ecileh]

The Hunter Dee thing is interesting to me because I have been around long enough to remember when it didn’t matter at all what kind of cheek your bit had, when everything was a full cheek, and now…it’s a Dee or death. Those last two phases are in the same barn with the same trainer, btw. I remember having to hunt down a waterford with a Dee to show my gelding in the mid 2000s…even though I already owned a fullcheek waterford that we had shown in earlier in our career. At that time, waterford Dees were next to impossible to find–now they are like Starbucks.

When my big mare was still green, we went through a million bits trying to find the right one to balance her usually light mouth with her tendency to start hauling on the bit while jumping. I had grown up showing QH (English) and suggested a snaffle kimberwick at one point and my trainer was AGHAST. (We settled on a jointed mullen Dee, which is magical.)

When I started fox hunting her (at 11) and was having trouble figuring out what bit to hunt with, one of the Masters suggested a mullen kimberwick and it turned out to be the perfect bit for the job. I got lots of side-eye at home about it, though.

My second mare goes in a Dee french-link at home, but I hunt her in a snaffle kimberwick (again, side-eye at home). The trainer was putting some ring miles on her for me and felt like she didn’t have quite enough bit for jumping, so I brought in my hunt bridle for her to use. More side-eye, but the ultimate verdict was that it solved her problem while not really stepping into a “harsher bit” (she had been wanting to go to a twist or a knife edge, but I knew the mare was perfectly controllable in the kimberwick snaffle, so, no).

Which is all a very long-winded way of saying “so much of this is about style, not substance”. When pressed about why she thought Kimberwicks were so awful, all she could come up with was “They look what you see in the 4H ring at the State Fair”. Nothing wrong with the mechanics of the bit–it just doesn’t “look right”.

One of the (many) reasons I stopped showing was because I have never been the sort who likes to have to pay attention to style. The right brand of breeches, helmet, the right color shirt…the right cheek piece on my bit. It was not the show world that I grew up in and it annoyed me to feel like I had to conform.

[RugBug]

@ecileh

Which is all a very long-winded way of saying “so much of this is about style, not substance”. When pressed about why she thought Kimberwicks were so awful, all she could come up with was “They look what you see in the 4H ring at the State Fair”. Nothing wrong with the mechanics of the bit–it just doesn’t “look right”.

Many people, including myself, dislike Kimberwicks because they are ‘neither here, nor there’ bits. A hodge-podge of bits. And from an aesthetics purpose…they are ugly bits and do nothing to flatter a horse’s head. (and yes, that does matter… As an example, I posted a picture of my TB in a pelham. It emphasizes his tiny mouth, a full cheek makes his already long head look that much more so. The same mouthpiece in a D-ring? Elegant. well, IMO. ).

But, If a kimberwick works for you, then use it. Especially while hunting. if you don’t care about the ‘picture’ in the show ring, then use it there too…or go to shows where it’s not unexpected…

@ecileh

One of the (many) reasons I stopped showing was because I have never been the sort who likes to have to pay attention to style. The right brand of breeches, helmet, the right color shirt…the right cheek piece on my bit. It was not the show world that I grew up in and it annoyed me to feel like I had to conform.

Hrmmm…I do pay attention to style but don’t necessarily conform. I feel very little pressure to dress in the uniform or put my horse in certain tack. I haven’t used a martingale in years (only when the one horse was flipping his head excessivly because he snarfed up bugs and was traumatized. :lol:), I show in a half pad or shaped, fleece girth or leather, etc based on what is clean and what will make my saddle fit as closely to how it does at home.

Perhaps that’s been the trainers I’ve been with, but I do what I want. :lol: They tend to trust that I’m not going to make them look bad (or don’t care.)

[Gamma]

@BigMama1

Lovely horses and interesting to note the small differences in turnout. But the biggest thing that struck me - as someone who hasn’t been anywhere near a hunter ring since the 80s - is how much the style of riding has changed. Does George Morris get the vapours when he watches these classes?

Hmm, hand position generally seems to indicate that prayer is happening–maybe it helps?

Also lately I have been loathing my D ring, yes it looks pretty, but that stupid thing where the rein gets flipped over and caught on the flat side is annoying. (Interestingly, Google is telling me that a D ring is actually a compromise bit between a full cheek and something round like an eggbutt or a loose ring…I never thought of it that way, but it makes sense, and right now D rings are annoying me with all of the low points of both sides of the spectrum.)

[Pennywell_Bay]

HU105 clearly states that kimerwicks are “unconventional”- correct? So at a hunter show, if you choose to show in unconventional tack because it makes your horse go better, more power to you. But don’t complain because it is stated in the rules that you may be penalized.

I’ve always shown in full cheek snaffles (until recently). My mare prefers them and to me, it is more aesthetically pleasing on her head.

[ecileh]

@Pennywell Bay

HU105 clearly states that kimerwicks are “unconventional”- correct? So at a hunter show, if you choose to show in unconventional tack because it makes your horse go better, more power to you. But don’t complain because it is stated in the rules that you may be penalized.

Oh, I wasn’t complaining about not being able to show in a kimberwick (though I did show in them in the 80s and did quite well). Sorry if that was unclear.

What I was trying to get at was that my trainer didn’t even want me using one at home because of the look of the bit–because show-ring style [and rules, apparently] finds them to be unconventional.

As I said above, I’m no longer showing, but even when I was, I didn’t much care about the look of a particular bit and how it changed the “picture” of my horse in a ring. I’ve always been pretty utilitarian in nature and I’d much rather have a nice, controlled course in an “ugly” bit than be dragged around in a pretty one.

Someone above in the thread mentioned that they’d rather use a pelham with a snaffle mouth than a dee that is hiding a bicycle chain–and I agree. If hunters are judged on manner and way of going, it shouldn’t matter if the bit in their mouth is unconventional or not.

[Pennywell_Bay]

@ecileh

Oh, I wasn’t complaining about not being able to show in a kimberwick (though I did show in them in the 80s and did quite well). Sorry if that was unclear.

What I was trying to get at was that my trainer didn’t even want me using one at home because of the look of the bit–because show-ring style [and rules, apparently] finds them to be unconventional.

As I said above, I’m no longer showing, but even when I was, I didn’t much care about the look of a particular bit and how it changed the “picture” of my horse in a ring. I’ve always been pretty utilitarian in nature and I’d much rather have a nice, controlled course in an “ugly” bit than be dragged around in a pretty one.

Someone above in the thread mentioned that they’d rather use a pelham with a snaffle mouth than a dee that is hiding a bicycle chain–and I agree. If hunters are judged on manner and way of going, it shouldn’t matter if the bit in their mouth is unconventional or not.

I wasn’t being snarky. Just more commenting. I agree- use what works best for your horse.

[RugBug]

@ecileh

As I said above, I’m no longer showing, but even when I was, I didn’t much care about the look of a particular bit and how it changed the “picture” of my horse in a ring. I’ve always been pretty utilitarian in nature and I’d much rather have a nice, controlled course in an “ugly” bit than be dragged around in a pretty one.

I’m pretty utilitarian, but I also appreciate aesthetics. Therefore, I will use what works for my horse…but I will find the thing that looks best as well. Kind of like how I want a comfortable couch, but I also want it to work with my decor.

@ecileh

Someone above in the thread mentioned that they’d rather use a pelham with a snaffle mouth than a dee that is hiding a bicycle chain–and I agree. If hunters are judged on manner and way of going, it shouldn’t matter if the bit in their mouth is unconventional or not.

Isn’t ‘how much bit is needed to produce the desired performance’ a piece of “manners?” I think it is. Where things go awry is that you can’t necessarily tell what is in a horse’s mouth, so the pelham, that is perceived to be bit with more control options, is looked at as harsher than the D-Ring, despite the unseen Segunda mouth or whatever.

Also, there are a LOT of different types of bits and bridle set ups out there. Are you really saying that if a horse is wearing a kineton with a three ring that it should be just fine?

[Midge]

@RugBug

Also, there are a LOT of different types of bits and bridle set ups out there. Are you really saying that if a horse is wearing a kineton with a three ring that it should be just fine?

Oh please, I so want to see that!! With the reins on the bottom ring, of course!:eek:

[ecileh]

@Midge

Oh please, I so want to see that!! With the reins on the bottom ring, of course!:eek:

I actually have seen a kineton in the show ring (schooling show) and, really, the only reason I gave it a second glance was because I had never seen one before and I was trying to figure out what I was looking at. Full disclosure: the show was at a local barn famous for its contraptions used to control horses…so while it looked odd and unfamiliar to me, I didn’t really find it shocking.

I’m not suggesting that anyone is wrong for wanting to have TheLook in a hunter ring. Totally fine. You do you.

[snaffle1987]

The hunter arena and its judging is based on the picture set forth before the judges. Yes, it is supposed to be about the horse and the judging is supposed to reflect that. But if you enter the ring with a blinged out helmet, sparkly crop, button braids on the wrong side, a pink squarepad, etc in a big class; you are distracting from your mount and dare I say disrespecting it.

The higher end hunter rings at the bigger shows should be respected from a traditionalist sport. If you don’t like tradition and elegance, class and respecting all of it; by all means go to the Pony Club ring or such where it’s okay to add some sparkle to your wardrobe.

Fads will always exist in the sport. It is a sport of wealth people with lots of money to spend. But it is also a sport of tradition and respect and that is something that I was always taught when prepping for the shows and showing.

I am not necessarily a critic of bit choices. Hunters of yesteryear went in Pelhams and double reins. But I will note that the bit you choose to ride in can reflect the horse, its behavior, and its way of going and distract from it. I just think a beautiful polished D ring that fits a horse well makes a hunter look so classic and elegant. Today, D rings are made in many styles and shapes to fit one’s needs but again, certain versions of it can detract from the appearance one is trying to set forth. Nothing makes me cringe more than seeing Pony hunters at Pony Finals cantering around with D rings 10 sizes too large for the head and many of them are double twisted wires or horses with a rig of bit in the hunter ring. If the horse needs that kind of hardware; maybe its best suited for other rings or a different rider

Half pads don’t bother me so long as they are white and fit well to the saddle. Saddle pads should not be a distraction. Same goes for bridles. In recent years the new thing on warmblood-types is these god awful thick nose and brow bands with massive fancy stitching. It makes the horses look like they belong pulling a plough or cart in the city and detracts from their beautiful heads. I was always taught that the bridle should compliment the horse’s head. Raised brow-bands or fancy stitching, I don’t have a preference but why on earth do we have brown and nosebands that are 3 inches wide in the hunter ring. Compliment your horse.

Braids: all horses can be braided on the right side but if it must be, I don’t see a major distraction on braiding to the left if the braids are traditional in style. In fact, I probably wouldn’t notice right away.

Black tack: definite no-no. Again; if you want to compete in the hunters; compliment your mount. If you want to come over from eventer-land and have a try at the hunters in the tack you have; perhaps the local schooling or unrated show is best-bet for those with non traditional tack. Again, you are trying to paint a picture of traditionalism and class in the ring; not detract from it.

white breeches: I am fine with it if it is adults only or if an older junior is running from ring to ring. But if youre showing in a classic or such; tan breeches all the way

Hunt coats: I am fine with all colors from black to navy to a dark gray or hunter green. No fancy piping on the coats, bling, etc. As long as the jacket is well-fitted and has no “add ons” I am fine with it. colors of hunt coats is more of a fad thing, I believe. I personally prefer a nice navy/dark blue jacket. It just looks great with black boots, helmet, and gloves. a gray jacket always looks smart on a grey horse.

saddle brands: more of a fad thing than a traditionalist thing. If the saddle fits the rider well and doesn’t make them ride in awkward positions, brand should matter. As with any tack in the hunter ring it should be well cleaned

Martingales: I just think a standing martingale compliments the appearance over fences. But it only compliments the appearance when it is properly fitted. We have a habit in the hunter ring of tying horse and pony heads down with the martingales and they go around the ring looking like they are being strangled. It should neither be too lose. Again, COMPLIMENT the overall picture.

[SnappyAppy]

@snaffle1987

The hunter arena and its judging is based on the picture set forth before the judges. Yes, it is supposed to be about the horse and the judging is supposed to reflect that. But if you enter the ring with a blinged out helmet, sparkly crop, button braids on the wrong side, a pink squarepad, etc in a big class; you are distracting from your mount and dare I say disrespecting it.

The higher end hunter rings at the bigger shows should be respected from a traditionalist sport. If you don’t like tradition and elegance, class and respecting all of it; by all means go to the Pony Club ring or such where it’s okay to add some sparkle to your wardrobe.

As a member of Pony Club and a horsemanagement instructor, I find this comment very offensive. Those kids are held to very high standards for formal presentation of themselves and their mounts, and are not allowed to “add some sparkle to their wardrobe”. Especially not at shows, where the majority of them are hunter riders.

[chirpybirdie]

i am currently dealing with demystifying a few myths of my own…

3’6 horse a rare beast?
Pushbutton horses made of gold?
The goal is not to ride it’s just to look good?

been lied to all these years of horses… totally in a completely different dimensional existence than everyone else.

[RugBug]

@snaffle1987

Saddle pads should not be a distraction. Same goes for bridles. In recent years the new thing on warmblood-types is these god awful thick nose and brow bands with massive fancy stitching. It makes the horses look like they belong pulling a plough or cart in the city and detracts from their beautiful heads. I was always taught that the bridle should compliment the horse’s head. Raised brow-bands or fancy stitching, I don’t have a preference but why on earth do we have brown and nosebands that are 3 inches wide in the hunter ring. Compliment your horse.

Sometimes a wider browband/cavesson DOES compliment the horse. Also, looking back to our roots, flat hunt bridles can be pretty darn wide. :winkgrin:

I think it’s interesting the see the rest of your list. I have a pretty good idea of what era you belong in based on your likes/dislikes.

[MegBackInSaddle]

I’m quite pleased and surprised that it took 6 pages for any snark to develop on this topic! I’d have lost money on that bet.

It’s pretty simple. Hunters is a game (as is Jumpers, Eventing, Fox Hunting, Dressage, etc). You either think it’s worth playing or not. If you want to play, you then abide by the rules (written and unwritten) to whatever extent you wish to and are capable of. shrug

All things are silly. Having a car and buying skinny, padded shorts and riding a bike as far as you can without dying is silly. Riding ponies around in circles, in some version of the proscribed uniform and with some version of the proscribed mannerisms while jumping over easily avoidable objects, is probably even sillier. Everything’s silly and then you die.

I did find this discussion really interesting and thought provoking. Particularly the discussion of bits. I feel they are so personal. The hand-mouth connection is SO personal. Along with seat and time together and so many countless details. In general, I think you find the bit that’s best for that horse and rider connection. And understand that if it’s a leverage bit, that horse and rider combo has a slight handicap as Hunters (at this particular time) compared to a duo that can match them step for measured step with a snaffle.

There’s substance and style. Both factor in. Style changes over time (more or less rapidly and drastically in different disciplines), though substance endures.

[TheMoo]

@MegBackInSaddle That is an excellent post. I think the whole point of this thread was to point out the myths that Snaffle so clearly outlined. Those are all her personal preferences. Hunters are very traditional, and a lot of people talk about the look of the equipment rather than the using it for its purpose.

You really can tell from people’s opinions when they started riding hunters. My barn as a junior was very correct in the education and turnout. I learned a crest release and then was expected to be able to do an auto release. Equitation was a must regardless of ring.

What is traditional to me is different from others. The color of the tack was never a thing. Non-leather girths were for schooling and the D ring bits did not have a variety of mouth pieces. No short jackets. Breech color depended on the fashion and really was the biggest variable. A real flat hunting bridle with a sewn in bit meant you really knew your stuff.

I also find it funny how when people talk about their personal no-no’s it goes from conservative turnout to someone going overboard with a bedazzler.

[RHdobes563]

Dating myself here…

I can’t HELP it, but when I see a D-ring, I think RACE HORSE. I love(d) the look of an eggbutt snaffle and/or full cheek snaffle With Keepers.

[TheMoo]

@RHdobes563

Dating myself here…

I can’t HELP it, but when I see a D-ring, I think RACE HORSE. I love(d) the look of an eggbutt snaffle and/or full cheek snaffle With Keepers.

Yes!!! Current horse goes in a French link eggbut. It never occurred to me to buy a D-ring and she doesn’t need a full cheek. Previous horse had a loose ring, she was pretty fussy but we never showed hunters because she definitely was not suitable. I did try my currrent mare in the loose ring but she likes a bit of stability. I have an old rubber D-ring laying around somewhere.