about wilbur. about ellie. about emily. em is a gem. blog gems. contact wilbur and emily.  

Wednesday, July 9, 2014

Blog Hop: Unpopular

L. @ Viva Carlos asks in her latest blog hop- what's one unpopular horsey opinion that I have?

Inevitably whenever the hunter division is brought up on COTH, be it for poor hunter eq, jazzing up the courses, the "good old days," there's a general theme woven in asking the question- "We keep manufacturing a division for everyone at any level, and those divisions grow and take away from all the divisions. What can we do? We have top hunter riders, from pony riders through professionals, from all over the country. What goals are we having our riders aspire to?"

This quote comes from a Susie Schoellkopf at at the Chronicle in her article- How Do We Inject Excitement into the Hunters.

Oh man. I get a bee in my bonnet every time this comes up but I'm too afraid to comment lest I am murdered while sleeping. 

Listen Susie. Gone are the days when TBs (go OTTBs) galloped around an entry level 3'6" course costing nickels on the dollar. 
And it's not coming back. 

Adding the Crossrail, Long Stirrup, and 2'6" divisions at rated shows have opened the doors to the true amateur owner- one that has a career, family, and fits riding in whenever they have a spare moment. Their steadfast, although perhaps not derby, horses get them around the ring so they can come out with a smile and enjoy a glass of wine with their barn buddies. Some may use these divisions as a stepping stone and some may not. And there's no shame in not moving up. 

Let's get real. It's not like local rated shows attract a spectator audience anyway- so suggesting that lower levels weaken the crowd is quite ridiculous. There's not much of one to begin with. 

Frankly- it's a business. The more competitors that sign up- the more money for the show and trainer. What trainer wants to take 2-3 3'6" riders and leave the rest at home? What show only wants to open divisions to 3'6"+ riders? They'd cut their entries by more than half. Even at the 3' level. 

Cost. These shows are expensive. For real. And the horses that are winning in the big hunter ring are too. I'd love to get Ellie into that ring someday but also recognize that we probably wouldn't have a shot in hell of getting some satin (fingers still crossed to just get there). News flash- I've never shown above 2'6" at a rated show. Because I've barely been able to afford to own a horse- let alone one that was made enough to jump around the AAs. 

On a tangent- .70 meter Jumpers? Same damn thing- why does everyone gripe at the Hunters. 

So for me? I want to go to a rated show, be in the "scene," spend time with friends. I'm not chasing points. I'm there for the experience. And there had damn well better be a crossrail class for me to show in. Because if I have fifteen hundred bucks to drop on cantering around a course, be it crossrails or a derby, take my money and say "good luck." How am I possibly hurting the sport by showing in a crossrail division at a rated show, coming out of the ring, and saying, "GO ME!!!"


  1. That sound you hear is me applauding all the way over here on the east coast.

    1. Seconding that East Coast applause:)

  2. Completely agree. At most shows, it's people like you and me that pay the bills!

  3. Absolutely! I've been meaning to write about the evolution of the adult amateur and the expansion of involvement in the sport. Having lower divisions opens showing up to those who can't afford to or don't want to or don't have time to move up and it is a net positive gain.

    Remove sticks from asses, folks.

  4. AMEN!!!! You nailed it and I appreciate your honesty and putting so nicely in to words how I also feel. THANK YOU!

  5. I am not sad about having low level classes - I love that and think it makes horse showing much more accessible for a lot more people. What I AM sad about is the loss of the dominance of the more galloping/forward pace with more traditional courses. Watching hunters these days kind of makes me want to poke my own eyes out, they're loping along like snails and most of them like they've spent a long time on a lunge line or had a few too many shots of mag/dex/whatever else. That's exactly why I don't do the hunters - I just can't support that. Except for the derbies because they tend to be different... more forward... just BETTER. Hey look, I think I just found my first really unpopular opinion! LOL

    1. I certainly enjoy watching a Hunter Derby above all else!

  6. Agree BUT I hate it when people who shouldn't' be in those lower divisions are... makes it unfair for the rest of the people who have a green horse or are trying to get back into shape (after having a baby lol) when their 3 ft packer is packing them around the 2 ft course year after year after year.

  7. Well said, and the same thing can also be said for eventing. The lower levels are where the majority of entries are and we go out and have fun. What the heck can be wrong with that?