Trends in Dressage: Anyone seen the article?

[Eclectic_Horseman]

[QUOTE=exvet;6718133]
YOU are not the norm, however, and I mean that in the nicest way possible. <smile/wink> I think that if you’re an ammy with a lifetime horse, or maybe one that is limited/older, you just want to have some fun, then schooling shows are fine. But if that horse is going to be for sale at some point, or you want to see how your horse really stacks up, the recognized shows are the way to go.

AH Shucks! Well I’m sure it comes as no surprise to you that I was often referred to as Abby in school for Abby normal <wink> I do see your point and don’t really argue with it. It’s just that I also see the “other” side and with the second kid going to college, well, schooling shows continue to look more and more appealing. They don’t pay us Humane Society vets all that much and with 9 horses to feed, the announcement we just got in our GMO newsletter that entry fees are going up yet again definitely has curbed my taste for recognized shows.[/QUOTE]

And it is not JUST about the cost of the recognized shows themselves. If most people are realistic about what they are (well meaning, trying really hard, but not very good riders) riding crappy horses not suited for dressage, who can’t afford instruction that is very good very often, then why spend all that money showing to get scores in the low to mid 50s? When you do that, aren’t you really just underwriting the shows for people with more money who have more time to ride, better instruction, and fancier horses? People who, for the most part, look down on you because you don’t really belong there? To pay all that just to be humiliated and feel lousy about yourself, your horse, and your circumstances?

Looked at that way—aren’t the higher costs really too high a price to pay for so much “fun”?

[exvet]

[I]And it is not JUST about the cost of the recognized shows themselves. If most people are realistic about what they are (well meaning, trying really hard, but not very good riders) riding crappy horses not suited for dressage, who can’t afford instruction that is very good very often, then why spend all that money showing to get scores in the low to mid 50s? When you do that, aren’t you really just underwriting the shows for people with more money who have more time to ride, better instruction, and fancier horses? People who, for the most part, look down on you because you don’t really belong there? To pay all that just to be humiliated and feel lousy about yourself, your horse, and your circumstances?

Looked at that way—aren’t the higher costs really too high a price to pay for so much “fun”? [/I]

Hmm, well, not sure how to take that. I certainly rack up the low scores. Could say I’m a crappy rider with crappy horses but I don’t think it’s an accurate statement. They range from types that if I’m lucky and the day is perfect might earn a 58-60 at third due to their gaits to the type that earn a 70% if they show up and keep all 4 feet in the arena, again due to gaits, so I think I know the range of horseflesh out there. Regardless I don’t go out to the recognized shows with the attitude that I"m going to win or lose but do the best I can with the circumstances at hand. Isn’t that a part of good sportsmanship? For all those times I do get poor scores I don’t look at it as subsidizing the rides of others but more the point of needing to go home and work harder. Get another horse, a new horse, a bigger or better horse? LOL Don’t think it’ll help most of us. Now finding better instruction, putting more money towards better instruction…yup sounds like a more prudent plan if you want to improve your scores. However, how do you know if that investment worked if you don’t show recognized and that’s your measuring stick?

I’ll continue to hit the recognized shows just a whole lot less due to the COST, not because of some self-defeatist attitude. I have hopes of earning my gold medal and unless the requirements change I do have a chance at doing so, maybe not a great chance but a chance which is what I think keeps a lot of us going/showing; but, I will certainly have no chance if I boycott recognized shows completely because someone insinuates that my horses are crappy and/or I can’t ride my way out of a paper bag. No, again sorry, that may be others’ attitude but I’m happy to have what I have won albeit hit or miss. I score what I score because I don’t do this for a living and spend 50+ hours a week doing something else that pays the bills.

While I get your point, it just demonstrates the point that I’ve heard many make over the years each and every time the USDF “tries” to find out what amateurs want…perhaps it’s time to truly deliver on what amateurs (and actually a few pros too) need - access to better and more affordable instruction. Better horses, nah, as unconventional as they are, I’ll keep the ones I have and my realistic view on the ceiling, thank you… all the while I test my theory on recognized shows a couple times a year.

Signed, Abby <wink>

[Eclectic_Horseman]

[QUOTE=exvet;6718197]

While I get your point, it just demonstrates the point that I’ve heard many make over the years each and every time the USDF “tries” to find out what amateurs want…perhaps it’s time to truly deliver on what amateurs (and actually a few pros too) need - access to better and more affordable instruction. Better horses, nah, as unconventional as they are, I’ll keep the ones I have and my realistic view on the ceiling, thank you… all the while I test my theory on recognized shows a couple times a year.

Signed, Abby <wink>[/QUOTE]

I am glad that you didn’t take my post personally, Abby. I don’t know you personally and my comment wasn’t meant personally. I was trying to demonstrate what so many USDF people just don’t seem to understand.This sport has become too rich for the average equestrian.

It is not a matter of poor sportsmanship. One can exhibit ones good sportsmanship just as well at a schooling show. But it only takes riders once or twice to realize that they are out of their league at a recognized show, at least in my region. If you are showing at third level, you are well beyond the riders that I am talking about–who I believe are the majority.

[exvet]

This sport has become too rich for the average equestrian.

No argument there, absolutely none.

If you are showing at third level, you are well beyond the riders that I am talking about–who I believe are the majority.

Actually I show at several levels because of this addiction I have for my breed; but, I was one of the “average” riders not all that long ago.

It’s a struggle, no doubt. I became discouraged many times but was determined, still am. I juggled kids, job, spouse, horses many times not too well. There are a lot of things I cannot afford and sacrifice a lot to do what I do. I am very lucky because I have a family who are great co-dependents. However, and all the while I support the schooling shows as a participant, I still see a reason to show recognized and feel the need to show recognize. This hasn’t changed just because I ride a variety of levels. I felt this way all the while I was struggling at training/first level for the first time.

I personally would like to see the recognized shows made more attainable to the majority. Heck I would certainly benefit. I enjoy seeing a wide range of breeds at the shows and dearly hope not to see the recognized shows turn into a showcase for only those who can afford the high 5 figure horses on up. I don’t think it matters what level I am able to ride. I still take greenies who are valued in the few hundred dollars range to recognized shows and understand what it’s like to go in and have to be happy that I earned a 60 because it will never have the gaits to warrant a 70. So I don’t think I’m so out of touch.

I have seen opportunity classes fill up decently and felt this was a reasonable way to make recognized shows more available to the masses. Facility use fees, stabling fees and those damn drug fees are the costs I balk at time and time again. Too bad show management can’t find sponsors or means to defray those costs (and that’s not a criticism to those who put on shows just a wish made out loud). I also wonder whether the system in place in the UK would be preferable/doable. I always looked at it as a division in social class not riding skill. Perhaps it’s time we here in the US recognize that’s where we’re at and put it in place. I can’t do much about the poodle show aspect and have chosen a long time ago to focus on rider certificates, rider medals, and all-breed standings to assess my own progress. If the schooling shows did have a more standardized way to assess the same I probably would never set foot in the recognized dressage arena (imagine the car I could have been driving all this time <wink>); but, the reality is that they don’t. I must agree with Dune on this. Again, I think USDF/USEF needs to focus more on making it (showing rated shows) more affordable for the masses but the truth is they don’t care to which takes us right back to square one. Each one of us chooses how to proceed daily in this journey of dressage. If solely going to schooling shows does it for you there is nothing wrong with that; but, I do see a reason to go to recognized shows, thus save up accordingly whether they want my white trash behind there or not and it’s not my riding skill that makes me an outcast <wink> They’ll see me less but they’ll still see me :eek:

[Perfect_Pony]

[QUOTE=Eclectic Horseman;6718217]
I am glad that you didn’t take my post personally, Abby. I don’t know you personally and my comment wasn’t meant personally. I was trying to demonstrate what so many USDF people just don’t seem to understand.This sport has become too rich for the average equestrian.

It is not a matter of poor sportsmanship. One can exhibit ones good sportsmanship just as well at a schooling show. But it only takes riders once or twice to realize that they are out of their league at a recognized show, at least in my region. If you are showing at third level, you are well beyond the riders that I am talking about–who I believe are the majority. [/QUOTE]

I don’t know, I actually see the opposite. And I am in one of the wealthiest areas of the country, surrounded by loads of rich people on fancy horses. But I still see people out there competing and winning on Arabians and Quarter Horses and Halflingers and all other sorts of horses. Because at the lower levels people are still judged on their ability to ride the horse and put in a decent test. The ammy bouncing around on a horse they can’t ride well isn’t going to win no matter how much money she spent on that uber fancy import.

[MeghanDACVA]

Are there any STATISTICS run on the data? All that is presented is raw data. It looks impressive but without STATISTICS we don’t know if the reported numbers are real differences, (ie p<0.05).

Anybody know? Or have any contacts with Centerline to get the stats done?

[MysticOakRanch]

[QUOTE=Eclectic Horseman;6718145]
And it is not JUST about the cost of the recognized shows themselves. If most people are realistic about what they are (well meaning, trying really hard, but not very good riders) riding crappy horses not suited for dressage, who can’t afford instruction that is very good very often, then why spend all that money showing to get scores in the low to mid 50s? When you do that, aren’t you really just underwriting the shows for people with more money who have more time to ride, better instruction, and fancier horses? People who, for the most part, look down on you because you don’t really belong there? To pay all that just to be humiliated and feel lousy about yourself, your horse, and your circumstances?

Looked at that way—aren’t the higher costs really too high a price to pay for so much “fun”?[/QUOTE]

I understand your meaning - the part about dressage just getting too expensive. But many of those “crappy” horses would have been strong contenders 20 years ago. That is much of the frustration I think many have with dressage. That it has become much more about the big gaits then about anything else. It use to be that the emphasis was on purity of the gaits, and the “BIG GAIT” scores were limited to a few movements, such as the medium and extended trot - the brilliance movements, and of course, the overall gaits collective score.

It use to be that you could do OK with an average horse - if you were a decent (not brilliant, but decent) rider who had put their time in on some decent training. I refuse to use the word “crappy” to describe average horse/rider teams - I reserve that for a very few people who are way out of the league. Now these aveage horses and riders are scored out of the sport.

If USDF wants membership, they need to be inclusive - they need to recognize people DO want to show and do OK without having a $100,000 horse. I’ll admit, I love watching Totillas go - he and Ed Gal were a BRILLIANT team - but I also think part of the brilliance was the training - the beauty of the transitions, the balance and accuracy of the pirouette. I believe the judging should focus on that, and the big gaits shouldn’t wow judges quite so much in the movement-by-movement scoring. I totally understand the judges are scoring as the current standard requires - but maybe the standard can shift a bit back.

There was a time when an average horse could compete in the Olympics if well ridden - not anymore. Not in the medals. The emphasis has changed - gaits are all consuming. And that does turn off the average rider who can’t afford such a horse, and probably couldn’t ride such a horse if they DID get one.

It is more then the cost of the shows - although that is just a symptom of the overall cost of the sport. No longer a discipline for the middle class.

[exvet]

If USDF wants membership, they need to be inclusive - they need to recognize people DO want to show and do OK without having a $100,000 horse. I’ll admit, I love watching Totillas go - he and Ed Gal were a BRILLIANT team - but I also think part of the brilliance was the training - the beauty of the transitions, the balance and accuracy of the pirouette. I believe the judging should focus on that, and the big gaits shouldn’t wow judges quite so much in the movement-by-movement scoring. I totally understand the judges are scoring as the current standard requires - but maybe the standard can shift a bit back.

I’m sure it surprises you none that I am all for this should it ever happen but seriously I don’t think it will or can. The “machine” has been made much like what evolved in the hunter world. The breeding and sales driving the machine are far too dependent on making the horse that all “lust” to have. The tests are written to favor that and the horses bred to meet the tests. Vicious but very lucrative cycle for those partaking at the top.

Before all start berating me about training and the like, I am the choir. I still show because occasionally, very occasionally I can still do well by my personal measuring stick. I only have one horse that can show up and win in the smaller recognized shows just because of her gaits and “overall” quality. Heck I could sit backwards, hang off her side and/or stand up in the saddle and I think even if she reacted to all that we’d still do OK. Do I think this is right? No; but, it is what those in power have developed to make it on the map and/or maintain their dynasty.

I was always against creating a showing system or venue that separated the “other” horses from the ones we need now to get the gait and thus the rest of the scores in the 7s on up (essentially purpose bred for dressage from those bred to be all-rounders or suited to another purpose); but, the reality is what it is. I think now to be inclusive we are going to be forced to create a caste system within dressage. The schooling shows vs. recognized shows are in some way that already; however, one can’t reliably measure or be sure how they compare to other parts of the country with the system as it is now. Of course once you try to apply a standardization process you get more planning and people involved and immediately USDF/USEF start screaming about the justification to make it more expensive. In this age of IT, the increase in costs to do this would be rather small, then divided among the real masses would hurt very little.

[MysticOakRanch]

Exvet, I agree with your post. I went through the USDF L program about 8 years ago in the hopes I could gain an understanding of WHY dressage judging was moving toward big gaits and away from training - I came away understanding the rules, understanding how the rides are judged, I get it, and I can play by the rules and the guidelines. But it makes me sad:(

I also agree, the rules ain’t going to change. The system is geared toward the higher end - you can’t even become a judge now unless you have a fancy horse - so it becomes self perpetuating. Especially if you show in one of the higher end regions - I’m in Region 7, California - if you venture out at 2nd level or above, you better have a fancy ride. Its OK, I get it, but - UDSF needs to get it too and understand this is why they are losing numbers. It isn’t just education, it isn’t just the cost of shows, it is the whole movement to $$$ - of course they lose membership - because the vast majority aren’t in that league.

OK, off to ride before it rains:)

[exvet]

OK, off to ride before it rains

Good luck with that. It’s been raining all day here since I fed at 5 am. Luckily I did get all ridden yesterday but today is a bust which is why I’ve posted more times on this thread than I think I have on this board in the last two months :winkgrin:

[NOMIOMI1]

Mystic dont get too down about it

People may have to make concessions but it CAN happen. I saw a horse online for 5k showing 1st with good scores and she was as fancy a mover (WB) Ive ever seen at the top levels but she was 15.1 so her price was way low.

Ive also seen plenty of really nice horses that were a bit too hot for their owners undersell.

You have to learn to ride the trickier ones, or less fashionably bred ones, but they are out there if you look!

I personally know a very fancy TB doing uber well at PSG they have big dreams to do GP with him and so far it looks like they might!

I get a bit sideways when I see more and more good riders unable to move up because of the lack of gaits but honestly I ALSO see more and more awesome horses coming down the pipeline because you can BUY the gaits but you have to ride them

[Eclectic_Horseman]

[QUOTE=NOMIOMI1;6718652]

I get a bit sideways when I see more and more good riders unable to move up because of the lack of gaits but honestly I ALSO see more and more awesome horses coming down the pipeline because you can BUY the gaits but you have to ride them :)[/QUOTE]

Really? It isn’t just about fancy breeding-- it is also about buying a horse that was professionally trained to a high level. Then maybe your BNT schools your horse 3-4 times a week and you get on once or twice a week.

Its not just about the fancy gaits, but of course there is that, too. When you have the money to take a lesson every day from a BNT or have your horse trained several times a week by a BNT, you may still be an amateur, and certainly no one can criticize you for the the amount of money and effort that you are putting into the sport. But very few people, no matter how many sacrifices that they make, can afford to do this. It’s great for them that can, and lots of folks are jealous and would love to be able to put that amount of time, effort and money into the sport. But it is just not possible for most.

[MysticOakRanch]

[QUOTE=Eclectic Horseman;6718876]
it is also about buying a horse that was professionally trained to a high level. Then maybe your BNT schools your horse 3-4 times a week and you get on once or twice a week.

When you have the money to take a lesson every day from a BNT or have your horse trained several times a week by a BNT, you may still be an amateur, and certainly no one can criticize you for the the amount of money and effort that you are putting into the sport. But very few people, no matter how many sacrifices that they make, can afford to do this. But it is just not possible for most.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I cut your post down to a few key sentences - but yes, I totally agree. It isn’t just about having the $ for the horse - then it is about being in training - horse stays tuned up, rider gets ongoing lessons. That is the equivalent of a monthly mortgage payment, just for the training/board. Sure a few people manage to “go it alone”, but the ones I see really advancing with regularly good scores are always in full training. And often have gone through a couple of schoolmasters in the process. That is just not the real world for the vast majority of riders - again, that grass roots majority of USDF membership.

Just agreeing with your post Eclectic!

[cnm161]

Keeping horses isn’t inexpensive. I spend slightly less than my mortgage on my house to keep my two equines living the life of luxury. If I didn’t have the job I have, or had kids, or wanted to travel, or any of a wide variety of things, I wouldn’t be able to do it.

This is not an issue unique to dressage. H/J, eventing, reining, breed shows, etc. have the same base costs of equine upkeep. If you’re interested in doing any of those at a high level… Add to that showing/training/tack/accoutrements/etc. and you face the same issues that we have in our sandbox. Are the issues we’re outlining here specific to dressage?

Some are, sure. Other industries have lower levels of shows that tend to be cheaper; breed shows have single-judge rail classes that can minimize costs while maximizing entries.

Trouble is I don’t know enough about other disciplines to say if enrollment is down or if others are as peeved at their governing body. Anybody care to weigh in?

[millerra]

I’ve already weighed in on this subject. But I was probably rather grumpy sounding in my reply.

I know locally that eventing numbers took a hit during the first part of the economic down turn but the numbers seem to be rebounding.
I specifically have quit showing recognized dressage. I did have an old event horse that I’d take to a couple of dressage shows a year when I’d fit it in between events and clinics. During the period when discussions about qualifying scores and some rather negative talk about the lower level rider were abounding, I had a frustrating experience at a dressage show. I am NOT crying about the ribbons or the scores per say, but the frustrating part of judging. At our debut at third, and by no means perfect, I got some very conflicting scores from two judges. One judge liked the more forward, energetic ride and scored accordingly. The other judge liked the more, erm, collected, slow, careful type ride. How do you know which is correct? What do you work for? Which comments do you ignore? Which ones do you respect? I only showed for feedback but it is somewhat pointless if the feedback is totally dependent upon what the judge prefers… At least when you event, even if you get a bad score, you can still go have a blast jumping… So, along w/ the qualifying ideas and nasty comments, I said enough…

[MorganJumper848]

[QUOTE=cnm161;6720447]
Keeping horses isn’t inexpensive. I spend slightly less than my mortgage on my house to keep my two equines living the life of luxury. If I didn’t have the job I have, or had kids, or wanted to travel, or any of a wide variety of things, I wouldn’t be able to do it.

This is not an issue unique to dressage. H/J, eventing, reining, breed shows, etc. have the same base costs of equine upkeep. If you’re interested in doing any of those at a high level… Add to that showing/training/tack/accoutrements/etc. and you face the same issues that we have in our sandbox. Are the issues we’re outlining here specific to dressage?

Some are, sure. Other industries have lower levels of shows that tend to be cheaper; breed shows have single-judge rail classes that can minimize costs while maximizing entries.

Trouble is I don’t know enough about other disciplines to say if enrollment is down or if others are as peeved at their governing body. Anybody care to weigh in?[/QUOTE]

Eventing entries have been down. Divisions used to be always 12-25 people and now we are starting to see divisions that are under 12 people unless it is a show like Richland Park or Hagyard Midsouth three day. Its caused people who have inexperienced horses not to come. Divisions are small and there are hardly ever prizes. H/J attendance at the A circuit level is also down. Some of these shows have 2-3 people in a class and then they can’t use their score to qualify for regionals because it requires 6 people to be in the class. So now people are trying to pay others to enter in the class so that their score can be counted. It is a mess and those shows are 3 times more expensive than eventing or dressage. The fees have gone up for people attending because there are less people going so the trainer charges more etc, etc. This is going to be a huge problem until either show fees go down, or people have more money coming in.

[oldernewbie]

Main ring Arab shows are definitely down and have been for some time. It was shocking to drop out of the show scene in the late 80s when I got pregnant - things were still booming then altho the changes in the tax laws cause a bunch of folks to get out of Arabs - and then drop back in 3 years ago when I got my new horse. Drastically different. The only segment of Arab showing that is at all robust is sport horse/dressage and some of the headliner main ring shows like Scottsdale (altho I have no idea how their current numbers stack up against the old days).

In my limited sort of recent experience, Saddlebred shows are the same. If they didn’t have academy classes there wouldn’t be much new blood there. Morgans have been holding their own I think - have only gone to Gold Cup recently.

In any breed/discipline, the reasons are quite similar. The upper reaches of whatever require a phenomenal investment of money to be competitive. It was so in the olden days too, but the gap between the upper reaches and the rest of the competing population was not nearly so great.

I’m not sure any association has figured out the middle way yet - they are all beholden to the folks with the biggest investment, yet can’t afford to lose the aspiring middle or dedicated DIY’ers. The only group that seems to have come close is AQHA as they keep adding more and more new designations to accommodate different classes of riders.

Sorry for the essay but I am interested in the dynamics of the current showing situation from kind of a sociological viewpoint as well as a horsey viewpoint.

[Gloria]

[QUOTE=Eclectic Horseman;6718217]

It is not a matter of poor sportsmanship. One can exhibit ones good sportsmanship just as well at a schooling show. But it only takes riders once or twice to realize that they are out of their league at a recognized show, at least in my region. If you are showing at third level, you are well beyond the riders that I am talking about–who I believe are the majority. [/QUOTE]

EH, don’t you think, that if a rider realizes that they are out of league, the first thing they ought to be thinking is, “geesh, maybe I should find a better instructor, and learn to ride better?” I mean, you might need a fancy horse to win(hard to get 7s if your horses don’t have nice gaits), but you certainly don’t need fancy to “belong”, get my drift? My horse when ridden by a better rider than me, can score solid 7 & 8 at first level under the toughest judges - by me? solid 6 and 7s. That is a full point below what the horse is capable of, and that speaks volume how much I am not up to par, and how much I need to improve. And that also means, another rider on a more average horse has a fair chance of beating me fair and square, if they get their act up. On the other hand, if a rider get discouraged simply because they feel “don’t belong”, honestly I don’t think USDF or any organization can help them because that is tenaciousness of mental strength we are talking about here, and whether that person has the drive to strive for improvement. By the way, my horse is not those $$$ horses - not even close to it, lol.

As to the cost of recognized shows, that is a whole different issue…

[big_bay_horse]

My money is as tight as anyone’s, but I prefer recognized shows. I like to see how I stack up against the big boys in the big pond. I also appreciate how much I can see and learn spectating at a recognized show, I can go home completely re energized and motivated. Schooling shows are cheaper and I’ll do better, but they begin to depress me.

[NOMIOMI1]

I also do think the judges want to score good riding with a comfortable horse doing the job easily enough.

I dont think they want to smack down anything flat or more average.

I do think its easier to make a mistake with a higher start value in gaits, and I am hoping they will eventually lean away from these “hunterish” type ideals and get back into higher values placed on horsemanship.

I can understand flare adding to the overall picture but I think if the gap widens too much we will continue to see so much fallout.