Some of you responded to my post being concerned for Rob’s career as being overly dramatic. I would just like to address that. The horse world is a very small place, made even smaller by the internet. There have been over 14,000 views on this thread. When you are an independent contractor, reputation is everything. If there are people on here accusing someone of being a cheater, using illegal substances, and being immoral, that can definitely affect one’s ability to get clinics, judging and course design jobs, and make a living. I’m a little surprised the moderators have let this continue this long as these accusations are clearly unsubstantiated based on the response from the USEF.
But they aren’t unsubstantiated. He gave pretty crappy advice, and in my view his advice is immoral.
Let’s not whitewash his behavior just because it’s not illegal as per the letter of the law. It still very much violates the spirit of the law.
All that aside - even if he were to have said “use a blue saddle pad instead of a white one”, the advice would still be about a quick fix on a young horse with a rider who seems to be doing just fine (with perhaps a few tweaks) and a young horse that just perhaps needs a little mileage.
[QUOTE=rosebecard;7649025]
Some of you responded to my post being concerned for Rob’s career as being overly dramatic. I would just like to address that. The horse world is a very small place, made even smaller by the internet. There have been over 14,000 views on this thread. When you are an independent contractor, reputation is everything. If there are people on here accusing someone of being a cheater, using illegal substances, and being immoral, that can definitely affect one’s ability to get clinics, judging and course design jobs, and make a living. I’m a little surprised the moderators have let this continue this long as these accusations are clearly unsubstantiated based on the response from the USEF.[/QUOTE]
Everything said here is very true. All the more reason for independent contractors to think before putting it on the internet. But nothing here is going to motivate the mods to pull it. It’s really not been a personal attack at all. It’s legal and there has been a side discussion on that point, also not personal. Great many on here, even if they do show, don’t know RG anyway… Doesn’t impact his reputation with me, haven’t seen him since he was just out of Juniors, rarely hear his name back here or up east.
Just a reaction to very unhelpful advice regardless of who gave it, how tired they were, how their clients love them or how nice they are. It is still unhelpful advice. And we can question that coming from anybody including our own community of posters-and we do. Regularly.
Im glad 14k views have been made, maybe people will examine their own programs and think about what they are doing more. Carefully selecting shows and classes, using traditional training methods for horse and rider and not jumping on a marketing bandwagon looking for a quick fix.
[QUOTE=Halt Near X;7648946]
To be clear, my post is not a word-for-word transcription of Diana’s comments. It is my summary of the conversation.[/QUOTE]
With drug rules, you really need to be careful about using correct words because what you’ve written is a 180 degree change in what I’ve always understood to be the rules-i.e. if you are giving your horse mood altering substances to calm them for peformances, you’re in violation of the rules, regardless of whether or not they’ll actually be able to catch you or prosecute you at this point. You’ve stated that their actual position is that as long as you’re not using something that is on the prohibited list and testable, then you’re not violating the rules. That has never been my understanding of the rules. I would hope that the USEF would clarify this in writing.
I suspect the actual message was “Yes it’s against the rules, but you’ll never be caught”. And that is sad.
[QUOTE=rosebecard;7649025]
Some of you responded to my post being concerned for Rob’s career as being overly dramatic. I would just like to address that. The horse world is a very small place, made even smaller by the internet. There have been over 14,000 views on this thread. When you are an independent contractor, reputation is everything. If there are people on here accusing someone of being a cheater, using illegal substances, and being immoral, that can definitely affect one’s ability to get clinics, judging and course design jobs, and make a living. I’m a little surprised the moderators have let this continue this long as these accusations are clearly unsubstantiated based on the response from the USEF.[/QUOTE]
The small voice of COTH forums counts for very little. Occasionally there is a small ripple in the show world, but for the most part, we are “the little people” and ignored. If COTH forums counted for much, there are plenty of trainers who would be out of business.
That said, you are not wrong. These days any person can be held responsible and experience consequences from the tiniest comment or action…even if taken out of context. In this day an age, when people dig for dirt and the littlest thing can cost you a big contract/job, etc, it’s really important to make sure what you put out there is ready for mass consumption. Society IS too quick to put labels on people: Drugger, Cheater, Killer, Hater, etc, even if those labels don’t really encompass the truth.
Can’t see from the film what the problem is. If he were cantering any slower he’d be walking. Is this what is expected now?
With all those followers on social media, and all that web traffic, JMR shouldn’t be concerned about the number of views on COTH. You all seem well aware of the large numbers of riders who visit the site. If RG stands by his advice, who cares about the hits on this thread? I, for one, only visit JMR in connection with a post on COTH. So, you’re welcome. 
And, just to clarify, RG has been described as a “business partner” and as someone who “volunteers” and generously gives his time. So what is he? A business partner who makes money from critique ing rides and from ad revenue, or is he a volunteer, and therefore can be forgiven a lapse in judgement?
I would also like to point out that GM never assumes riders, often all four riders in his PH column, are above being told to shorten their stirrups and drop their irons to strengthen their leg.
Kudos to JMR for posting meup’s comment and leaving the whole thing up.
Bleary eyed, but still wanting to help, he called the bit a pelham, when it was a snaffle.
So he meant “Oh good, big strong horse you’ve already got him in a snaffle”?
Whether his advice was “Stick him in a Pelham” or “Oh good he is already in a Pelham” I’m not sure that it is great advice based on the video. Again, he addressed the horse with a quick fix, and not training or riding.
[QUOTE=OneGrayPony;7649209]
So he meant “Oh good, big strong horse you’ve already got him in a snaffle”?
Whether his advice was “Stick him in a Pelham” or “Oh good he is already in a Pelham” I’m not sure that it is great advice based on the video. Again, he addressed the horse with a quick fix, and not training or riding.[/QUOTE]
I’ve got to disagree with you there. A Pelham is not a quick fix. IT’s a useful tool.
honestly, I can easily forgive the pelham/snaffle mistake. Rob certainly knows the difference, so I’m imagining he was looking at the video on his phone. Don’t know what his eyes are like, but sometimes I can hardly see my phone after along day even WITH my reading glasses on.
Rugbug, I love Pelhams, I do. But when you aren’t the trainer, personally evaluating the horse, I feel sincerely uncomfortable giving that advice before suggesting that the horse might settle with time, or exercises to help her back him off a bit and be a bit less strong.
That’s what I mean.
[QUOTE=OneGrayPony;7649245]
Rugbug, I love Pelhams, I do. But when you aren’t the trainer, personally evaluating the horse, I feel sincerely uncomfortable giving that advice before suggesting that the horse might settle with time, or exercises to help her back him off a bit and be a bit less strong.
That’s what I mean.[/QUOTE]
But a pelham is a good choice to help with a strong horse to help them settle. You can use the curb when needed, have the brakes in case things get out of hand…BUT you don’t HAVE to use the leverage at all.
I always take my pelham with me in case I need a quick change of bit for an over enthusiastic horse and wouldn’t hesitate to mention it for someone that was having control issues.
I know if my horse gets away with someone, I’m going to be in big trouble. She’s smart and quickly learns where my holes may be. If I need a pelham so she gets the message that taking off bucking toward home after jumping a crossrail is a no-no, you can bet it’s going on her…and I wouldn’t be offended if someone suggested it to me. 'Course, I would also evaluate that advice against her tendency to get angry if you get in her face too much…and my tendency to get handsy when I get nervous.
Let me put it another way - it’s the addressing of the equipment and the horse rather than any training or riding techniques.
Again, not slamming the Pelham. I may be a bit of a purist on this one where I like to address those other things first, then a tack change if necessary.
Oh and I hear you, I had a TB who was pully and strong in a single joint, put him in leverage and he liked to leap about in the air as protest!
I also like a pelham a lot. But it can be used both as a tool, as part of a thoughtful training program, and as a gimmick. Saying to someone “you’re tiny and weak, use a pelham” is different than explaining that the horse needs lift/self carriage and explaining how the rider might achieve that through use of a pelham.
[QUOTE=NCRider;7649071]
With drug rules, you really need to be careful about using correct words because what you’ve written is a 180 degree change in what I’ve always understood to be the rules-i.e. if you are giving your horse mood altering substances to calm them for peformances, you’re in violation of the rules, regardless of whether or not they’ll actually be able to catch you or prosecute you at this point. You’ve stated that their actual position is that as long as you’re not using something that is on the prohibited list and testable, then you’re not violating the rules. That has never been my understanding of the rules. I would hope that the USEF would clarify this in writing.
I suspect the actual message was “Yes it’s against the rules, but you’ll never be caught”. And that is sad.[/QUOTE]
It’s as accurate a representation of the conversation as I could make it without having a recorder, but it’s not a transcription. It’s a 180 degree turn from what I have always understood as well, and I double checked on the spirit of the rules aspect because I really didn’t believe what I was hearing.
But I’ve said from the beginning–people need to contact USEF themselves. If you think what I heard/reported can’t possibly be right, instead of “hoping that USEF would clarify this in writing,” EMAIL THEM.
1 Like
I have seen both sides of this argument many times. I have shown with and without Perfect Prep and have chalked up my pre-show nerves as to why my horse was quicker/more nervous/pulled more. PP isn’t going to take you from a 9th to a 1st. I had a peer I went to college with who used to Ace her horse before her hunter classes. He was an 8 year old TB and she used to Ace him. Brilliant right? I think the Hunter and Equitation ring are all too reliant on drugs and LTD. Perhaps do what I did and learn to RIDE YOUR HORSE BETTER before going to a show. If the horse makes you nervous or doesn’t place the way you want him to, maybe you should take more time in lessons to actually ride the horse you have properly.
I can’t get the video to load, but do have to say this: And my flame suit is on,
I only met Rob once when he was giving a clinic up here and the riders here got more from his clinic then they had from any other clinician. I was the chauffeur as I had to go past the hotel and had the chance to chat with him each day. I felt beyond privileged to get to talk with him about past horses he had, horses I have, and training in general. Even though he was putting in long hours, he was very bummed that he forgot his charger and would not be able to put the usual 4+ hours in on JMR. All those trainers on there are giving very timely critiques and advice for free, so I think it is a bit of a low blow to that site and the wonderful people offering advice to rip into them about one thing that was said.
[QUOTE=Couture TB;7649530]
All those trainers on there are giving very timely critiques and advice for free, so I think it is a bit of a low blow to that site and the wonderful people offering advice to rip into them about one thing that was said.[/QUOTE]
I agree. Give the guy a break. It’s a free website. He gave a snipit of information (which did include a fraction of riding advice). It’s not like he told the girl to go shoot her horse up with some harmful drugs or lunge him to death. This thread has become exhausting and pointless. Go ride your horses.
[QUOTE=jonquil;7649076]
Can’t see from the film what the problem is. If he were cantering any slower he’d be walking. Is this what is expected now?[/QUOTE]
I don’t agree. The horse gets quick before and after the jump, then the girl slows him down tooooo much only to build back to the next jump.
there are over 17,000 views on this thread , I think perhaps instead of having 1000 people call the USEF for a clarification of a phone call , wouldn’t it be prudent of them to address this board regarding the Drug rules and spirit of the rules ??? If what has been said is true then it needs to CLARIFIED by them .
