The Legacy Cup - a Big $$$ Spotlight for Hunters

[Cactuskate]

I was wondering what happend to the 3’3" division. I showed A/A’s years ago and if memory serves it was 3’ to 3’3". It really would make the step up to 3’6" more logical.

Also regarding why does it “look” so much bigger? I have found that since I am surrounded by Terminal X’s here in the desert, my eye has shrunk. I have just started working with some adults that are returning to riding like myself. We may start schooling our 2’ and 2’6" fences but when they arrive for the lesson everything is set a bit higher. I move them down to start them. Some are left up. I know I am talking teeny tiny heights to most of you. But we all start somewhere. My point is, set the fences higher, even if no one is jumping them. You look at them long enough and the teeny ones you are doing will look shrimpy.
It is all an illusion…

[3eme]

It took something as drastic as a move to Europe for me to realize that there is such an unnecessary psychological 3’ vs. 3’6" barrier instilled into our training in America. Looking back, I think I would have had a lot more fun doing the Juniors had I known then what I know now! Maybe I wouldn’t have gotten so worked up about, and so impressed by “the big move” up to 3’6".

Try to have this debate — all centered around a lousy 6" — with a trainer or fellow riders in Europe and they would probably think you were nuts! Go to any show and you see people in their first year of showing, little kids on ponies, and casual “weekend” riders happily (and safely!) finishing 3’6"+ courses! It’s the only option available. And riders just don’t think twice about it.

Sure, I’m certain that if suddenly classes a foot lower were available over here, there would be tons of takers — why not?? Great for practice, and great for building confidence, for the more shaky rider. And if that were to happen, I’m sure that showing in Europe would begin the slow “dumbing down” that I, personally, think characterizes the U.S. show circuit today, with it’s proliferation of 3’0 divisions, at the expense of what used to be.

It’s funny, but now I prefer when I see at least 4’0 at shows. It’s the smaller stuff that I hate, because I find I don’t ride as well (and it’s just not as fun!). And, believe me, I was one of those juniors that could do, but was VERY nervous at, 3’6", because I thought it was “big”! Oh how that’s changed!

Folks, it’s a matter of perspective…and collective psychology.

[J_Turner]

Perhaps the majority of us can’t afford a horse that jumps 3’6" safely and has the stride because the price has been driven up. I know there are finds out there (I had one), but if you go to a trainer and say you want a 3’6" horse but you only have $15K to spend, you’ll get laughed at. Unless, of course, you want a lame horse or one that’s 20 years old.

[Bertie]

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???

[AMom]

Also in support of the 3’ This issue has been hashed out here over and over. Please remember that not all of us own our own horses, and, with the current amateur rules, the only way we can show 3’6" is in the medals.

[AHC]

Slugger, as usual, well said!

[Bertie]

As for the lack of Junior Hunters at B/C shows, I’d say that it’s because the 3’6" horses are showing in the equitation classes. In the old days, a junior might show a horse in a couple of equitation classes and the Jr. Hunters. Now there are so many equitation classes, that to do the hunters on the same horse would be too many classes in one day.

[Janet]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LOUISE:
But, could someone please explain to me why 6" makes as big a difference as it obviously does? Thanks in advance!
[This message has been edited by LOUISE (edited 10-05-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

First, I think that six inches is a bigger jump for the rider thatn the horse. Not only does 3’6" LOOK scarier, but the horse has to push off harder (see below), and so it is much easier to get left or get ahead of the horse. It is also harder to stay organized on landing.

Similarly, a rider error at 3’6" often has more serious and visible consequences than the same error at 3’.

Second, I think that lots (if not most) of the horses competing sucessfully at 3’ could safely jump a 3’6" course. But MANY of them MIGHT NOT be able to do it as a “flowing hunter round”, maintaining the same speed, frame, and stride.

When you “jump” a cross rail, the horse doesn’t really have to “lift” his body very far, he just has to pick up his feet.

When you jump 3’, the horse has to lift his body a little bit, but it is still a gradual arc, and it is mostly a question of using the back and folding the legs.

At 3’6", the horse has to really lift his body out of the way. This means he has to push UP, and the arc of the jump has a much bigger vertical component. This makes it harder for the rider to stay with the movement(as mentioned above).

It is much easier for the horse to jump 3’6" out of a short, springy, “collected” stride with the wieght rocked back,(or even out of a longer, faster, but still more “rocked back” stride) than out of a long, slow, flat, hunter frame. But the long flat frame is the one that is going to get pinned.

I think this is one of the reasons we see repeated complaints about the shortage of 3’6" HUNTERS, but we don’t see the same complaints about the shortage of 3’6" JUMPERS (or even eventers).

Maybe this is the point to put in another plug for the 3’3 divisions, both as an end in itself, or as a stepping stone between 3’ and 3’6".

And of course this is all just my opinion.

[AHC]

Jair, you may be right for the show jumpers, and the juniors, however for some of us hardworking adults, even those of us who would love to do the 3’6" someday, the 3’ hunters is as far as we can go unless and until we become independently wealthy and able to ride every day and show more often.

[DMK]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cactuskate:
I move them down to start them. Some are left up…<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cactus - I know a few riders who do the A/O jumpers, and they do the exact same thing (start with fences over a foot lower than what they show at)… it isn’t just for the horses that we start small and work are way up…

[Janet]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VTrider:
[B] I think that depends on the horse…

It would be easier to take a machine around a 3’6" course (if the rider is able) than a pregreen horse around 3’ - IMO.[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

To continue my analogy - it is easier (for a capable rider) to ride a second level test on a schoolmaster than to ride an Intro level test on a tense, green, off-the track TB.

That doesn’t change the fact that the second levle test is more difficult. By riding the second level test (even on a schoolmaster) the rider is demonstrating something more “advanced” than riding the tense horse through the Intro test.

There is certainly a need for the people who can give the green horses the correct foundation (in any discipline). But that doesn’t mean you should expect the big prize money and the “showcase” for getting tense greenies through their first Intro test. (Though maybe you could expect big training fees.)

[DMK]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by havaklu:
[B] DMK are you refering to the same week as the ROLEX???

Ummm, I appreciate the concept, but the reality is that Rolex is the busiest weekend in Lexington due to the large number of SPECTATORS it draws. Every hotel for about 100 miles is sold out…

…Actually the GIHP is more “central” than VA IMO and is not a bad option either.[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, I have to admit, it was those spectators I was really excited about! I know there would be no way you could hold a full horse show AND Rolex, but 4 specialty classes, with top horses, designed to not drag on fooooorever and bore even the knowledgable public to the brink of death? It wouldn’t be easy, but who ever said marketing hunters to the public would be a cake walk?

Of course, I agree that option #2 should be GIHP!!

[system]

Kudos to the AHJF for recognizing the Hunter and Kudos to Towerheads for bringing it to the Horse Show Communities attention

[Goodmudder]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Caruso:
[B]Oh gee - 3’0 and 3’6" classes BIG WHOOP - Now they are giving LOTS OF PRIZE MONEY for mediocrity. Just great.

EVEN THE OPEN HUNTERS WILL BE JUMPING 3’6"???

SAD SAD SAD.

Good idea; lousy execution. Did they mention the entry fees?[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gee, Caruso, I wish you’d explain your post further. Are you sad that a lot of terrific 3 and 3’6 riders will get great opportunities? Are you sad because you apparently believe you’re overqualified to be included with these “mediocre” riders?
Could you explain for all of us why you think this will reward mediocrity, and what your definition of that might be? And, also, can you give any positive suggestions instead of criticism? Please, enlighten us.

[Janet]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by slugger:
[B]What exactly would be wrong with showcasing the 3’ and 3’6"?

There is place for the adult amateur division, and it is important not only financially for the horse shows but for the riders and horses.[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

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.

In eventing there is a place for Novice (2’11") and Training (3’3"). Just as in the hunters, these divisions are the biggest money makers. There are lots of people who never expect to move up to Prelim (3’6") for whatever reason. There are regional championships at these levels, but nobody expects “big money” or a “Showcase” at Novice and Training.

The same with dressage, and the training/first/second level competitors.

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.

[This message has been edited by Janet (edited 10-04-2000).]

[3eme]

Stirring up the pot, perhaps, but…

On paper, it sounds like a great idea, lots of fun. But I see a couple of negatives as well:

(1) Throwing bigger and bigger prize money (and most likely bigger entry fees) at hunters… don’t you think that this sort of thing will have a trickle down (up?) effect?

Think about it, the more these sort of things are encouraged, the more it is eventually going to find it’s way into the pricing of horses. If this becomes the wave of the future, people are going to be willing to throw more money into buying a horse… in order to win bigger prize money. The higher the entry fees, the more elitist it becomes, and soon only with the very deep pockets, able to afford big entry fees, will be able to afford competitive hunters. Isn’t this already happening to some extent??? Why make it worse? Do we really want to offer Grand Prix stakes so that our hunters will become systematically priced along the lines of Grand Prix horses?

I think one of the reasons that European horses are so much cheaper is because showing is so much cheaper!!! It’s all connected!

(2) Where’s the 4’0"?!? Okay…No…I’m not even going to go there… (ahem…except to say that I firmly believe that any capable 3’ horse should be capable of 3’6", that 6" shouldn’t be such a big deal, and that it is a damn shame that our sport is regressing!!..)

[Skipper]

AHC and cbv- we are VERY much on the same wave length.

Janet you did a great job explaining the difference between 3’ and 3’6"; those 6 inches are a big deal. And I totally agree with your statement about the hunters v.s the jumpers at the same height.

Good discussion!

[Magnolia]

It seems like the 3’ ~ 3’6 thing is a psychological jump that is hard to make. It took me going to eventing to be comfortable with height (don’t ask me why). It seems like the size of the jump with eventing is less of a big deal ~ yes, you do have different height divisions at events, but at home, if I need to school a coop - it’s 3’3 it can’t be lowered. Nobody makes a big deal over height. Some jumps maybe trickier.
When I did hunters, the only issue was height - Will I move up to 3’6? then you question if your ready to jump 3’6. The courses were the same. The only change was height.
I’ve discovered Nicolas jumps big fences better - you want him sharp - gallop a 3’3 fence. You want a dangerous jump? Canter a 2’3 vertical.
Maybe it would be good to have 3’ classes, but at A shows have roll backs, in and outs, trot fences. Give it some challenge. Have a big solid coop. Maybe set fences 3’-3’6 and have a tricky turn to a 3’ fence and an easy gallop to a 3’6 fence. For example, on a novice xc course, the inviting log jump might be the max height, but say a trickier jump on a drop would be 2’.
Or, everyone that is afraid of 3’6 can come to my lesson on Saturday and get the evil eye from Jatha while they try to get excused from jumping the hanging log or coop! Jump those once and you’ll be bored by your novice amateur jumps!

[AHC]

Flash44 makes an excellent point about making 3’ courses more challenging and designing them to teach riders to make decisions, ride forward, etc. I think that would help make the move-up easier. However, I wish we could stop making this a debate about whether us 3’ riders deserve recognition!

There are so many other isses to tackle…
Hunter courses are uncreative, judges reward stride counting and not brilliance, trainers know that it’s easier to get riders around at 3’ than it is at 3’6", trainers make money showing amateur’s horses in classes to get them “ready” for the amateur to ride, horsemanship is not taught often enough, people who work full-time cannot always get away for weekdays to do A/O divisions, the increment system is too complicated and rewards those who can show all the time, etc.

IMHO, we would do our sport more of a service by focusing on some of these issues instead of making those of us who do the 3’ feel like we don’t belong at the table if we are not focusing on moving up!

[Bertie]

Getting back to The Legacy Cup – a press release posted on Towerheads yesterday says that the Virginia Horse Center in Lexington, Virginia is the planned location. There was no mention of qualification requirements in the article or press release.