I would brush off what your friend said. For the most part, it’s untrue. Trust me, there’s no way that I would have survived a few of the high performance handy classes that I’ve done if my horse was just trundling along on her forehand. That would be a scary sight to see.
FWIW, I also take my same horse in the a/o jumpers, and she usually jumps clean. Often during the same show circuit where I’ve done a full week of just hunters. Still waiting for my horse to be ruined and crippled.
If were were to complain about hunters, it’s because I want beginner riders to have a more comprehensive learning experience that provides a solid foundation in horsemanship that will provide them with the building blocks that they can take with them onto other disciplines.
I’m not saying that many hunter riders are not given such foundations by their teachers, but I can say that I’ve seen riders riding hunter levels that made me feel concerned for their preparedness and possibly safety.
Certainly one might find similar fault in training for any discipline. But because Hunters seems to be the de-facto starting discipline for many beginners, I feel it should offer the most complete teaching modality.
But unfortunately I don’t think the collective politics of the hunter sport have the development and support of fundamentally complete teaching modalities designed into the sport in ways that one might consider them as part of the guiding principles of hunter politics.
The word “Dressage” after all, actually means “Training”.
It might surprise you to know that many hunter riders also ride with a dressage trainer.
I personally have not experienced the “politics” as some reference in this thread. The only thing I have experienced is the need to have a bit of cash so I can buy a quality horse, pay for training with a reputable trainer and pay the bills to be able to go to a lot of shows. This means winning classes. Maybe to some that may look like politics but the reality is - it is an expensive sport, takes a quality horse and a lot of hard work.
Especially the hunters and eq because it’s not easy making it all look amazing and you are relying on someones opinion of how you do look. Hence the need for some to call it political and quite possibly the reason to poo-poo it off to being an incorrect way of riding.
I’m a hunter rider who rides with an eventer who has competed in CCI****, but also done hunters and the grand prixs.
I’ve rarely heard a disparaging remark from upper level eventers about the hunter ring or it’s “politics.”
And I’ve learned a TON from her multi-disciplined approach.
Goes back to a good rider is a good rider is a good rider no matter what they’re doing. Riding properly is what it’s about.
Interesting that you feel that way. I usually have the opposite sentiment. Most of the youngsters at our barn begin in the hunter ring because that’s where you go to learn that just because you can run around at Mach-3 and leave all the fences up (cough most of what I see in the 2’6 jumpers cough) doesn’t mean that that’s good riding or good horsemanship. I think that the hunter ring (along with the lower levels of equitation that are held over the hunter course) really teaches you rhythm, pace and how to find a good, safe distance.
[QUOTE=chunky munky;7201094]
It might surprise you to know that many hunter riders also ride with a dressage trainer.[/QUOTE]
Then why isn’t dressage training a mandatory requirement for all students of the hunter discipline?
If you examine the goals of dressage, the fulfillment of specific training is a necessity for both horse and rider to come to the capability of preforming those goals.
The structure of the goal offers a guidance for the training.
Eventing includes a dressage phase.
Equitation includes tests.
What is the goal eliminate in hunters that prioritizes the training of the rider?
[QUOTE=alterhorse;7201149]
Then why isn’t dressage training a mandatory requirement for all students of the hunter discipline?
If you examine the goals of dressage, the fulfillment of specific training is a necessity for both horse and rider to come to the capability of preforming those goals.
The structure of the goal offers a guidance for the training.
Eventing includes a dressage phase.
Equitation includes tests.
What is the goal eliminate in hunters that prioritizes the training of the rider?[/QUOTE]
Good Hunter trainers know and have a Dressage background. But saying that; there are Dressage trainers out there that are not riding and teaching correct Dressage. So just because you are a SO CALLED Dressage trainer doesn’t mean it will benefit your riding.
I was lucky in that the trainer I grew up with always taught us that we can learn something from all disciplines. I love the hunters and always have. Oddly enough I have always been better in the jumpers. It doesn’t mean that one is easier or better than the other but jumpers really are my “type” of ride. I have a great amount of respect though for other types of riding. I have ridden with eventers and dressage folks. I have even spent some time with a saddlebred or two. Though I have never personally done it, it was a Western rider who really helped me get my baby started this year. A good rider is a good rider and an athletic horse is an athletic horse. It doesn’t matter the discipline. We all have one thing in common and that’s our love for these beasts. It’s really too bad that any riders would put down others.
[QUOTE=alterhorse;7201149]
Then why isn’t dressage training a mandatory requirement for all students of the hunter discipline?
If you examine the goals of dressage, the fulfillment of specific training is a necessity for both horse and rider to come to the capability of preforming those goals.
The structure of the goal offers a guidance for the training.
Eventing includes a dressage phase.
Equitation includes tests.
What is the goal eliminate in hunters that prioritizes the training of the rider?[/QUOTE]
It’s not a mandatory requirement because, well, we live in a free country. I think if you spent some time in a hunter/jumper barn, you would find that even their 2’6 kids know the basics of dressage, like shoulder/haunches in, leg yield, turn on the haunches/forehand, collection/lengthening, proper halt and reverse, etc.
I dunno, maybe that’s just my experience and every other hunter barn just practices loping around on a loose rein for 20 minutes in every lesson. /shrug
OP, is your friend 12 years old? Be honest.
Yes. Unfortunately, I think a lot of the time when people talk about politics, what it really means is that they:
THAT is not politics.
Politics are essentially the governing principles that guide the form the sport will tend to conform to.
[QUOTE=alterhorse;7201200]
Politics are essentially the governing principles that guide the form the sport will tend to conform to.[/QUOTE]
So, like, the rule book?
[QUOTE=goodlife;7201164]
It’s not a mandatory requirement because, well, we live in a free country. I think if you spent some time in a hunter/jumper barn, you would find that even their 2’6 kids know the basics of dressage, like shoulder/haunches in, leg yield, turn on the haunches/forehand, collection/lengthening, proper halt and reverse, etc.
I dunno, maybe that’s just my experience and every other hunter barn just practices loping around on a loose rein for 20 minutes in every lesson. /shrug[/QUOTE]
I understand your point of view.
All I’m saying is that I think there’s an element of “form follows function”.
Yes, I have spent time in hunter/jumper barns. I have known many good trainers offering good programs. But I’m not critiquing trainers. I’m looking at hunters from a perspective of examining exactly what hunters represent relative to the foundation principles of training.
Can you explain the principles of training that hunters represent compared to the horsemanship foundation?
To me the the “horsemanship foundation” is the entire spectrum of “classical methods” by which equestrians communicate with horses.
[QUOTE=goodlife;7201214]
So, like, the rule book?[/QUOTE]
The United States Hunter Jumper Association has a rule book yes.
But the nature of individuality may influence the shape of a thing, if the thing has no innate shape based upon it’s own inherent nature.
For a forest to be green, each individual tree must be green.
[QUOTE=alterhorse;7201239]
I understand your point of view.
All I’m saying is that I think there’s an element of “form follows function”.
Yes, I have spent time in hunter/jumper barns. I have known many good trainers offering good programs. But I’m not critiquing trainers. I’m looking at hunters from a perspective of examining exactly what hunters represent relative to the foundation principles of training.
Can you explain the principles of training that hunters represent compared to the horsemanship foundation?
To me the the “horsemanship foundation” is the entire spectrum of “classical methods” by which equestrians communicate with horses.[/QUOTE]
I really do not understand how a horse that has the straightness, pace control, balance, self-carriage, seamless lead change and style which form the principles of the hunter discipline could somehow be inherently lacking in basics.
Do you think that just drops out of the sky?
Granted, lots of lower level hunter people suck and can’t train that but that’s why they go run their students around the puddle jumpers and b*tch about politics.
[QUOTE=alterhorse;7201239]
I understand your point of view.
All I’m saying is that I think there’s an element of “form follows function”.
Yes, I have spent time in hunter/jumper barns. I have known many good trainers offering good programs. But I’m not critiquing trainers. I’m looking at hunters from a perspective of examining exactly what hunters represent relative to the foundation principles of training.
Can you explain the principles of training that hunters represent compared to the horsemanship foundation?
To me the the “horsemanship foundation” is the entire spectrum of “classical methods” by which equestrians communicate with horses.[/QUOTE]
I dunno, I’m no George Morris, I’m just a lowly amateur. But to answer your question, I choose to show in the hunter ring first because it’s fun for me.
In relation to horsemanship, I like the hunter ring because I enjoy having my horse turned out to the nines. As tedious as it is, I love the end result of spending hours brushing and scrubbing and polishing everything and getting that true gleam on your horse. I’d say that’s a better horsemanship lesson than a trainer that lets her kid show in the hopeful jumpers with long, shaggy hair, dirty tack and a few pee spots, because, well, it has no bearing on the end-score.
I also enjoy that feeling that I get when I am about 2/3s down a line, know that the distance out is going to be great, and I can soften on the reins and just feel the horse rock back and jump. Love it. I also love knowing that that particular feeling came from months of flatwork on my part - tons of sitting trot, bending and flexing of the body, pirouette canter circles, lengthening, shortening, small gymnastics, figure eights, circles, everything. The amount of flatwork that has to go into a horse before you can get that feeling of self-carriage in the middle of a line is a lot.
In the hunter ring, you need to be forgiving, subtle, soft, but effective. In my opinion, that’s a good indication of good horsemanship. Can you get the job done effectively, all while looking like you’re just out for an afternoon tea on horseback? Can you get the best out of every horse, meaning a big, correct, explosive jump every time out, while never changing your pace?
I’m not denying that there are some people out there that rely on chemical intervention and a whole lot of longeing to get their desired result, but laying down a great hunter trip a) isn’t easy and b) in my opinion, shows off a great deal of good horsemanship.
I’m just saying that by politics I mean going to a show and watching a flat class happen. A rider, whose trainer is a fairly BNT, messing up their leads completely yet winning the hack class. This same horse was first in the jumping rounds. It was quite obvious of the mistake in the ring, yet the rider still placed. I just have seen this types of situations happen all the time.
I by no means agree with what the OP friend says, I still think there is a level of riding and horsemanship required to compete and do well in the hunters and that each discipline has something to learn from the others. I practice dressage quite often when I school my Jumper. But I guess from what I have witnessed, not experienced, it has left a slightly bitter taste toward the hunter ring. I understand this doesn’t happen everywhere and isn’t a general rule of thumb, but I also have to agree with a lot of articles out now that mention the fact that hunters are veering off the path that they were originally created for. Again this is my personal opinion.
I’d say this wasn’t a case of politics, but rather bad judging, if it was as obvious as you say. I’ve never seen someone win a flat class that blew a lead, except if the judge (who is human) happened not to see it. If that is the case and it does happen from time to time, that person got lucky.
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
