Have you read about this? Posted yesterday on Towerheads http://www.towerheads.com/judges/judges20001002.asp
Sounds awesome! DMK, Colin, Duffy, etc…are you ready???
So instead of having a hunter classic, have a horsemanship classic. Have a riding test, a written test and a practical skills test where the participant wraps legs, takes the horse’s vital signs, demonstrates the proper fit of equipment…
I’d love to have this event at the KY Horse Park. Although we’re centrally located, it’s still a VERY long drive back East. Since we’re already doing it for Devon and the Indoors, I’m not sure another trip would be in the works. Lots of wear and tear on people, horses and vehicles.
KY Horse Park would be so much more centrally-located for people. I’m sure they’d get more participation from people west of the Mississippi.
How about the OKC State Fairgrounds? Awesome facility, super rings, great stalls, hotels and restaurants out the wazoo less than 10 minutes away, major airport about 15 minutes away, yada, yada, yada. Anyway, that’s only 15 minutes from home. It’d be an easy show for us! 
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by NorthEast:
I have also noticed a tendency for people on this board to criticize the 3’ divisions. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank you NorthEast - If it wasn’t for the 3’ Adult Amateur division - I would have to pick a new hobby, and I never was all that great at tennis!!
I think it should be at the first Legacy Cup! Once we find out where that is, of course!!!
Quote trom the Towerheads article…“A new innovative and enjoyable event that is meant to be fun, where you can win some real money.”
It’s so nice to see the word ‘fun’ included in the objectives.
I don’t understand the negative comments. I do hope the show eventually includes 3’9 & 4’ divisions. Otherwise I think it’s an absolutely great concept. I just can’t find anything negative about giving 3’ horses and riders an enjoyable and important horse show.
This show could actually encourage some amateurs to move up to 3’6". The AHSA offers no 3’6" division for amateurs who don’t own the horse. This show does. And it’s likely that there will be fewer competitors and possibly more prestige in the higher division.
At the same time, for riders and horses that are happiest at 3 feet, I think this show will be a wonderful experience. And it’ll be a great place to showcase up and coming human and equine stars.
The 3’ft. divisions are awesome!!! The horses are always turned out so well and the riders really seem to enjoy themselves.
The points about why people choose to do the divisions they select and that the height doesn’t matter but rather the actual round seem to fall of deaf ears! Oh well why waste the breath?
What I would rather see is some discussion on why a Grand Prix Rider can cross enter into the A/O hunters? It happens. And why can a Grand Prix rider cross into the Junior Jumpers or Amateur Owner Jumpers? Fine for a Junior it is remarkable to be competing at that level, but hey if you have the horses and can then give up the Junior Jumpers?
Meanwhile…there are so many cross entry restrictions in the Children’s and Adult Jumpers and Hunters? You would think that to “encourage” trying the higher heights that at least the rider on a different horse could cross enter.
Another point, since the A/A and Children’s hunters are so deemed by the critics to be stepping stones, then of course they belong at A shows? The atmosphere, the trainers, exposure of course should be had a 3’ft to more easily step into the 3’6", right??
Get over yourselves, I have asked so many times for these critics to show the rest of us what they do? Well?? Let us see how well and competitive you are in the “acceptable A” divisions.
Flash, I think you’re onto something in terms of courses. It would be nice to know that at the 3’, I could go to smaller, local shows to start with easier courses, but expect to have more questions asked, even in the hunters, at the bigger shows. This might even lead to people becoming better riders and then becoming more comfortable moving up. 3’3" divisions make sense too!
I have a hunch that if as I proposed the situation were reversed the whole philosophy of excuses would disappear. Adults worked just as much maybe more 10 years ago, they had just as many responsibilities and fears.
I have the feeling that all these reasons would vanish if these divisions were all C-Rated as are the 3’0" divisions and if they ran on one day as do the 3’0" divisions.
Don’t forget these are a relatively new phenomenon created simultaneously with the the “Increment System” and the 2 day rule.
I just find it illogical that people 10 years ago were braver, more confident or more foolish if you prefer. I believe in motivation and I think the present system has simply taken away any reason or benefit from risking 3’6". And, with a 3’0" goal what I see is the less dedicated limiting themselves to 2’6". So the bar is dropping and that 6 inches is getting bigger and bigger.
I haven’t weighed in on this one, probably because I am ambivalent about it in the way many folks have already expressed. I’m an adult over 40 who gets to ride 3-4 times a week on a very good week, not at all on weeks when work won’t let me go. So I understand that 3’ divisions are necessary to give people who would not have a slot at AHSA rated shows classes to show in and be successful and comfortable.
But on the other hand, I also agree with Jair and 3eme and the other folks who think that the goal should be to move up if possible, even if it is just while schooling at home. I jump well over 3’6" regularly at home, though showing I stick to the 3’0"-3’6" AA and schooling jumpers, for now at least. When I evented I competed at novice, but when we go out to school XC, I still jump lots of training level and prelim fences and combinations. I would hate to limit myself in my own mind to a particular height. But then, I don’t do the hunters, so I can’t say I know what goes in to doing a 3’ hunter round versus a 3’6" hunter round.
Magnolia, I think that’s a great idea about having a couple of fences at 3’3" and 3’6". It is much less daunting to jump a couple of higher fences than a full round, and think of the sense of accomplishment the rider would feel from having done it. 
[This message has been edited by Portia (edited 10-06-2000).]
well, if we are talking personal convenience, let’s talk Georgia International Horse Park
As much as I like the KY location, what does everyone think of the idea of holding at the same time as the eventing WC? OK, I know that it would be a planner’s nightmare, and take LOTS of work, but as all those annoying marketing people told me when I was in ops - “Think outside the box!”
Besides, I have always wanted to go up and see the WC, but never made the time… I wonder how many other h/j people would do the same if they “shared space”?
VT Rider, me too! I was not fortunate enough to have a horse to do the 3’6" on as a junior, so never became comfortable at that height. And as an adult with a full-time job, and a healthy understanding about my limits due to time and ability, I am thrilled that there are 3’ options for me and my horse. If my circumstances change, I would love to try to do the A/Os, but I don’t like to be made to feel like an incompetent who doesn’t deserve to be at the table because I don’t do them now.
As far as the Legacy Cup, I think it’s a great idea. A few things were fuzzy in the description, I assume because they haven’t been ironed out yet. I look forward to hearing more details and especially finding out where it will be held!
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AHC:
I think it should be at the first Legacy Cup! Once we find out where that is, of course!!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ok - I will bring my mediocre riding talents and my less than cool A/A horse and we will all have a great time. Maybe they will make a leadline class for us?
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Janet:
There is definitely a place for the A/A division. That is where I am currently showing. The question is whether a “Showcase” with “Lots of prize money” is the right place for it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
At this point, M&S and NAL “showcase” the three foot hunters at their finals. This is the cumulative effect of the steady increase in popularity, number of competitors, and interest in these divisions over the past 10 (give or take a few) years. Many of us forget that the Olympic games were originally a showcase for the amateur athlete. The best of the best of the amateur competitors to strut their stuff, with specific exclusion of the professional athlete. While these rules were revised in the past few years, the original concept warrants consideration in this discussion for the reason that “human interest” is drastically greater when the competitors are in fact amateurs. Scott Hamiliton received much more attention from the media as an amateur ice skater than as a professional. People are drawn to and supportive of figures they see as relate-able. An average person who has worked so hard for something they love because they love it, without being financially compensated.
<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> I can’t help but look at this discussion in relation to the discussion about the Grand Prix being too “easy” as one of the factors contributing to the lack of success at Sidney. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I understand what you mean. I see the similarity of the situations, yet perhaps we should differentiate between the amateur equestrian and the professional equestrian. The majority of Grand Prix competitors, at least the majority who could be classified as Olympic Hopefuls, are professional equestrians. Perhaps we should bring up the level of difficulty in our Grand Prix to put ourselves back on the same level as other countries. But should we demand the same of amateur competitors based on principal? I would gladly show only in the green and regular hunter divisions and prelim and open jumper divisions if I could do away with this D*** job and ride all day every day!
Very well said, AHC!
Here is a hypothesis for you to consider, if we could wave a magic wand and reverse things what would the result be do you suppose.
If all the AHSA Rated Divisions kept their requirements for height etc. but all at all Shows were one day and C-Rated.
And in contrast all the 3’0" divisions recognized by AHSA were calculated by ratings and in the increment system. Required to compete at the AA Shows which are all five day shows in order to be able to qualify for Zones and the other qualifying shows.
What do you think would happen? Would the 3’0" riders compete in the new schedule of shows and ratings? Would they drop back to the unrecognized divisions at 2’6"? Or would they be motivated to compete at 3’6" since it was convenient and affordable?
Do you think that making the courses more technical without raising the fence height would help increase the skill AND confidence of 3’ riders? the issue is not really the fence height, but getting your horse to the correct distance. It’s a fear of missing. Set up courses that TEACH the riders, instead of courses that encourage picking up your canter and holding your rhythm and not much else. Have a little bank or a small ditch, have riders hand gallop the last jump, or trot something that is 3’, not 2’. Set up a 4 to a 4 with the second line being a slightly shorter distance, or slightly longer distance. What is it about outside line - diagonal - outside line - diagonal that makes it so popular? It’s simple. As many people have pointed out, there are lots and lots of really good 3’ riders out there. Why not let them show off their talents in something other than an eq class or two.
I haven’t looked at this thread in a few days, and I just have to say… what a well-thought-out and interesting discussion! Kudos to everyone for offering so many different thoughts and ideas.
DMK, that’s a great idea! It reminds me a bit of the National Horse Show’s heyday, when it showcased so many different disciplines - hunters, jumpers, saddlehorses, roadsters…It had so much spectator appeal.
The differences between eventing and hunters would be great for spectators and exhibitors to see…to watch the demands of a top level event course, and the grace of a [B]scored[/B] (hopefully) hunter classic. Sounds like a plan…now, call 'em up!
I think the idea is wonderful! A Classic with real prize money that you don’t have to pound your horses all year long to qualify for!! I only hope I’ll have a horse to do it on, as well as be able to go!!
I don’t believe they’ve mentioned where it’s going to be yet. . .
And ditto to the above posts SUPPORTING the 3 foot!!!
[This message has been edited by Duffy (edited 10-04-2000).]
