I don’t think anyone is arguing that the successful young adults mentioned here have been very well-mounted since their junior years. We all know they have been. I think the point was that most, if not all of them, did not learn to post the trot at age 5 when Mom decided to sign them up for riding lessons on 250K ponies like Newsworthy. They most likely learned the basics, and paid their dues, on regular old lesson ponies just like everyone else. The thing is, no one (here on COTH) knew they even rode at all until they got good enough that they started riding the expensive ones at the big horse shows, so everyone (here on COTH) thinks they never rode anything before that. Here’s a fact: no one is going to let a 250K show pony be used for walk/trot lessons for someone who has never sat on a pony before, even if that someone is Bruce Springsteen’s daughter.
I’m assuming what they started on were the very best/most trustworthy/best teacher type starter horses/ponies. Which is again an advantage of money/access. I bet none of them started at an updown barn full of random OTTBs and half dead ponies. I assume even when they were little, they had access to the best horses/instruction to further them. Which, yes, for a little beginner isn’t a $250K “name” pony. But they still had access to the “best” for what they needed at every stage of their career. Different from many of us who grew up riding whatever was around/available/we could afford and perhaps couldn’t progress as quickly because of it.
I started when I was 7. On horses. Because the local lesson barn didn’t have ponies. And my parents weren’t horsey and didn’t know better. They were old plug types and I had lots of fun. But they didn’t jump. Would I have learned better and advanced more quickly in the hunters if I had the money/access to a high quality barn full of very appropriate (size and challenge level) mounts. Even if they weren’t $250K fancy name ponies but were the best to learn on? Sure.
I think it’s safe to say that someone like Springsteen had access to what was best/most helpful/most likely to help her advance at every stage of the game. At different stages that meant different things-- but she always had them if she needed/wanted.
Paying your dues doesn’t stop with lesson ponies, it also comes with making and re-making horses, because the other part that was humorous was bringin up a competitive rider who couldn’t work through an issue or ride without stirrups since she had a manicure scheduled. No names, but pretty funny.
This, right here. I’m coming from dressage but I was amazed how many BNTs in that discipline were sharing this and woohoo-ing someone “telling it like it is”. And you hear the same rumblings about Intro level at recognized shows or that low levels can do freestyles now. Somehow, an ammy on a quarter horse doing a training level freestyle is the ruination of the sport.
I always knew the BNT I lesson with occasionally was just there for the check but her knowledge made the attitude worth it to low level little ole me. But seriously, after she shared this and then posted a bunch of nonsense defending Prudent’s view about how low level riders are destroying equestrian competitions, I don’t see myself laying out $$$ to ride in front of her again.
I’ll take my lack of talent to someone who doesn’t have the “how dare they share our space” attitude. When I finally get my purpose bred, overly gifted young horse down center line, be it at Intro or Training or 1st, that lesson money will be in some other trainer’s pocket.
Bravo.
Please forgive my ignorance. Why do people need their trainer at the show? Wouldn’t it just be cheaper to have lessons and take your horse to the show to compete?
For people in most professional programs it is not negotiable.
Crikey! That does my head in. Have been to watch a couple of Show Jumping championships here in Australia and almost nobody is there with their trainer.
Having sold an extremely expensive horse to an Australian young rider, I’ll tell you that yep, the top young riders are absolutely at shows with their trainers, even in Australia.
In my experience, being at a show with your trainer is not the norm. It does happen but it isn’t what is happening with most folks. Was once in a group chat about competing. All the Americans couldn’t imagine going to a show without their trainer and all the Australians couldn’t imagine going with their trainer. I know enough to see how the conventional system in the USA could be really expensive.
But we’re really not talking about “most folks” in the US either. We are talking about a pretty small subset of people showing at rated shows from big programs. Many, many “normal” people go to shows every week without a trainer. It may be more common in the US to show with your trainer, but it is no more universal here than showing without a trainer is anywhere else. (We had this same question posed by a UK person maybe last year, there’s a thread on that if you feel like digging).
At least in my slice of the H/J world, most people don’t have their own truck and trailer, so they are pretty dependent on the trainer going someplace in order to get a ride. Once there, why not have the help of your coach? It’s part of the economics of getting the trailer ride, as well as to some extent part of learning to show and the fun of the event.
That doesn’t mean you can’t be self-sufficient at the show, but it is part of why many people don’t learn to be.
It’s funny to see trainers mourning the good old days when kids rode horse after horse without irons and to hear them mourn that kids today won’t do it and then to know that in their own programs they never ask the kids (or adults) to do so. Like the kids barely know it’s a thing. They’re convinced the kids wouldn’t do it or would leave but they don’t test the hypothesis.
The deadliest insult I ever got from a trainer, from someone I worked with occasionally, was when my horse was being erratic in a line and I was trying to work out ways to fix it, and she said, “Oh, you’re just an amateur, you shouldn’t be expected to deal with that.” That was like 25 years ago and I still haven’t really forgiven her. She’s a good teacher but she lost a great deal of my trust and respect with that comment.
I’m old enough to remember when we all went it alone at the shows, except for the few big time barns … we just made do and are still around today to prove it didn’t hurt us.
But WOW - this article has caused waves through all forums and many magazines! Never seen the like! If you didn’t know who KP was before, you sure do now.
Katie probably gave this interview “off-the-cuff,” without preparation, and spoke from the hip with a full load of right where she was coming from at the moment. While I don’t agree with everything she said, I give her tons of credit for for having the guts to give an honest opinion in this day and age of social media, where anything said by anyone of stature is going to be ripped to shreds, which has personal and business repercussions.
The problems of fielding competitive international Teams are not new, and have been under debate ever since the era of Bert DeNemethy (and Jack LeGoff, on the eventing side) ended. Once professionals were eligible to compete on the Team, there was no systemic cohesion anymore because everyone had “their own” system and a business to run.
Preparation methods and venues became diverse, fragmented, and opinionated and since that time Teams have been “a team” in name only. There can never again be a Gladstone or Ledyard or Hunterdon because the unique social, cultural, and financial conditions that produced those venues and systems (including the willingness on riders’ and trainers’ part to submit their egos and assets to the judgement of a Bert, George, Jack, or Denny) will never exist again. To lament the passing of that Golden Age is a self-indulgent exercise in nostalgia, which is not productive.
What IS productive is to ask: What were we doing circa 1984 that we are NOT doing now, and why AREN’T we doing it? The above paragraph provides some of the answer, but we also have advantages now that didn’t exist then–like far better, purpose-bred horses instead of using primarily cast-offs from racing. We have FAR better understanding of footing, physiology, and sports psychology. We have easier, faster air travel, air-conditioned vans, veterinary care on almost the human level second to none in the world. And, yes, we have PLENTY of money to burn. The class of people with deep pockets for horses Back Then are more willing than ever to spend today! Are we encouraging them to use that purchasing power to see that the BEST horses and riders make it to the International venues prepared to WIN?
THOSE are the day-to-day frustrations seen by people at Katie’s level.
As the Eventing and Dressage worlds have known for some time, the recreational levels which are the equestrian equivalent of a weekend round of golf or social tennis are a DIFFERENT SPORT from the FEI levels. There will NEVER be more than a handful of people the world over who have the ability, talent, drive, frankly OBSESSION level to do the top of their respective sports, and I mean in ANYTHING. Disparaging that level of sport I felt was Katie’s frustration talking; it has always been difficult for those with immense goals and limitless drive to achieve to understand those with other priorities. That was often the point of parting for myself and trainers I had over the years. Ammies have to balance their lives; for pros, at the high levels, riding IS 100% of their life, lending a certain myopia!
The arguments made here about “elitism” are also a straw man; since the “equestrian class” of the Romans right up through the “leisure class” of Veblen, (those who can spend their time and money doing ANYTHING they want) have historically chosen to do THIS. The way of access for others was historically by being a pro, and still is. That’s probably not going to change. The great question is, can pros care enough about winning internationally to put aside “more money” choices in favor of doing what is right for horses, riders, and fielding the best possible USET?
One more point: In the world of American horses, our entire “English” list of disciplines comprise demographically only about 18% of all the people who ride and show. The Western disciplines outnumber us 5 to 1, are FAR more accessible to “average” people, and a nationally competitive horse can cost about as much as a Hyundai, not a house in the Hamptons. Kids of all backgrounds, colors, and sexes are encouraged to be “cowboys” or “cowgirls” as an “All-American, wholesome” activity that has no “elitism” stigma to overcome. Furthermore, even at their lower levels of showing there is enough prize money that if you win occasionally it partially pays your way. Perhaps we should be looking a bit at what other groups and disciplines in our own country do, and how that system works for them.
Katie’s podcast will have served a great purpose if rather than taking it personally, it gets people thinking constructively about what the real problems are, and brainstorming how best to solve them.
Problem is, there are more larger shows, we have GCT, Longines, World cup, WEG, etc. There are probably 4 (?) USA “teams” all over the world.
More travel, more horses needed. More people are playing.
I actually think the USA is doing quite nicely, overall.
I am ok not taking it “personally” as you say if it had a coherent message and clear solutions. She attached the rich who buy horses and chide those that are poor. I am not sure what exactly she is so unhappy about besides- EVERYTHING???
The other reason people don’t do stupid shit is no one wants to get seued… good or bad people all have to watch out for themselves. I would not want to ride a project horse, why would I?
There are also more nations fielding competitive teams today, from more places, and this is mostly good for the popularity and success of the sport. Naturally, that does tend to mean any one nation might win less often… even if that nation is producing better horses and riders, or at the same level as in decades past.
As much as we love our stars from the 1980s, those exact same horse and rider combinations with the same skills would not be competitive today.
This can’t be overstated. I say the same thing about dressage. Now, I think if they were coming up now, the old school riders would have adapted, as would horses or different horses would have been chosen. But just plunked down out of the past into the modern rings? Much, much more difficult.
We know this and can see this because as pointed out elsewhere IAN MILLAR. Ian Millar and his horses have evolved with the sport.
This is part of the reason I posted the 1976 Olympic show jumping, because no, you can’t hurdle your way through a big course because even the fence designer concedes the jumps are so heavy they’re quite difficult to knock down…and there were still lots and lots of rails. Because hurdling. Great fun to watch, definitely more akin to paraphrase George of bringing the field to the arena.
A different sport. A great sport, but very different from today’s sport, which I also LOVE.
I love the smart catty horses and very technical controlled rides. I love love love it when someone takes the inside turn when no one else is. Sometimes it pays off, sometimes, man those rails fall. Much more calculated risk of speed to rails. So great to watch.
Where can one buy the official Fearful, Talentless Amateur gear? I want a saddle pad, or maybe a lunchbox, or decoder ring or a sticker to slap on the cantle of my saddle. 
