Competing at a lower level to 'warm up' - rant!

[spookypony]

Perhaps a comparison, from essentially the same debate in another discipline: in Endurance, we sometimes get people who feel that below 80km (that's FEI* distance), there is no real point (beyond getting up the levels), and that running so many Pleasure rides and short competitive distances is "dumbing down the sport". Some believe that riders should be limited as to how many of the shorter distances they can do with any one horse, to encourage them to go up the levels. Here, I can speak from experience both as a rider and as an administrator:

As a rider, I've now done 3 competitive seasons with my pony, and 80km is now hopefully within reach. I needed the competition experience at the lower distances, because I am learning on the job, so to speak, not having the benefit of professional Endurance trainers. There aren't many rides available at 80km+ (or even 60km+), and shorter competitive distances are a great way to build up more fitness. I don't plan to go beyond 80km classes at this point, for various reasons. It should also be said that in EGB levels, for example, 80km is Advanced.

As an admin, I see that the riders that prefer shorter distances have many different reasons for this: some are keeping older horses fit. Some enjoy the opportunity to ride in places where they normally wouldn't be able to go, just to enjoy the scenery. Some are doing cross-training for other disciplines such as dressage or eventing, where a fast 2-hour ride over hilly terrain is quite sufficient for their goals. Some are pursuing trophies specifically aimed at shorter distances (such as awards for riding in every branch in the country, or for achieving the highest number of Gold Award finishes).

Also, I am aware that rides of 80km are difficult to organise and expensive to run. For us, literally, the Pleasure riders and Taster riders (our equivalent to Intro; you don't even collect mileage) finance the upper levels. If we are running a ride with classes of 80, 60, 50, 30, Pleasure, and Taster, then with 40 entries, I might expect a breakdown approximately like this: 2, 3, 3, 12, 17, 3. Without the Pleasures and 30s, the ride wouldn't run. The Tasters function like the Intros in that lots of people do just a few, and then get into longer classes, or that people take a baby horse so that it learns about the procedures without getting overfaced, or getting high heart-rates due to nerves on its card. At least one 80km-qualified rider only rides Tasters now, just to enjoy the day out and support the club. If we changed the rules to force people up the levels, most of our ridership would just quit.

 

[khalswitz]

But what makes you think the same won't happen at 90? Aside from any qualification rules that there are.

From the moaning that often goes on on this forum about the standard of riding at 90, it's probably almost as applicable! Specifically regarding jumping and XC rather than dressage, the 'have a go' mentality of the lowest levels does encourage people to attempt them when they may not be ready. The RCs encouraging riders at that height without having done a few BEs at least I feel was a bit irresponsible, but ultimately the fact that they run affiliated events over these small heights makes the step into eventing seem easy, so when faced with tougher courses (esp at unaff venues like the one where the qualifier was run, which can be lots tougher than be) they don't have the skills to ride, say, a sunken road, or a half coffin, or an owl hole, or a double of skinnies (all of which were in that course).

Entering eventing at Novice, as in the old days, meant those skills had to be there at the outset, whereas with the simplification of courses in grassroots, they don't - and a championship or qualifying course (one girl I know wins regularly at 90 and has been eliminated multiple times at Badminton after qualifying, for example, and is therefore reluctant to move up) comes as a shock.

I probably come off as being a right bitch, but it's not that I don't think people should be encouraged, but I think with the downwards expansion of competition hasn't necessarily followed through with training IMO...

And I don't say this as someone looking down - I say this as someone who has really struggled, and having now finally actually started to improve and get on the right track, I see how little the system helped...

 

[be positive]

From the moaning that often goes on on this forum about the standard of riding at 90, it's probably almost as applicable! Specifically regarding jumping and XC rather than dressage, the 'have a go' mentality of the lowest levels does encourage people to attempt them when they may not be ready. The RCs encouraging riders at that height without having done a few BEs at least I feel was a bit irresponsible, but ultimately the fact that they run affiliated events over these small heights makes the step into eventing seem easy, so when faced with tougher courses (esp at unaff venues like the one where the qualifier was run, which can be lots tougher than be) they don't have the skills to ride, say, a sunken road, or a half coffin, or an owl hole, or a double of skinnies (all of which were in that course).

Entering eventing at Novice, as in the old days, meant those skills had to be there at the outset, whereas with the simplification of courses in grassroots, they don't - and a championship or qualifying course (one girl I know wins regularly at 90 and has been eliminated multiple times at Badminton after qualifying, for example, and is therefore reluctant to move up) comes as a shock.

I probably come off as being a right bitch, but it's not that I don't think people should be encouraged, but I think with the downwards expansion of competition hasn't necessarily followed through with training IMO...

And I don't say this as someone looking down - I say this as someone who has really struggled, and having now finally actually started to improve and get on the right track, I see how little the system helped...

I see where you are coming from but there does seem to be the need to compete at every level from the tiny child on the lead rein hanging onto the saddle as they "jump" a course barely staying on board at a PC show to competitors in all spheres going out without enough preparation which is why the lower levels of affiliated were introduced to cater for them and take advantage of the income it generates, if they are not prepared well enough then they will fail to do well.
If RCs are sending people ill prepared to area comps that is a failing that the RC needs to address, lack of training happens at all levels.

You now know that you would have been better to spend your time and money on training rather than competing earlier in the year but that has come through experience and getting more educated, without that experience you would not have the opinions you now hold, not everyone is as intelligent as you or open to changing their ways, the system can only help those that want to be helped, many instructors go through the motions and many riders have plenty of lessons but until the penny drops little will change.

As for the lowest levels they do have a place, my horse is coming back from injury and may never do what he was originally aimed for, BE, my current aim is to do intro dressage, I have never done a test at this level before but for him it will still be a major achievement to just get out to a competition, I need something to aim for having spent almost 2 years rehabbing him, prelim is a way off as he is still not really cantering but he is well enough established to behave in the warm up and enjoy a trip out.

 

[JFTDWS]

FWIW, I think the argument about eventing is a valid one - it's terrifying watching low level eventing. It really is. And I don't say that as someone with necessarily greater skills in that field, but as someone who isn't stupid enough to take the risk without those skills (both horse and rider) in place.

As for the lowest levels they do have a place, my horse is coming back from injury and may never do what he was originally aimed for, BE, my current aim is to do intro dressage, I have never done a test at this level before but for him it will still be a major achievement to just get out to a competition, I need something to aim for having spent almost 2 years rehabbing him, prelim is a way off as he is still not really cantering but he is well enough established to behave in the warm up and enjoy a trip out.

I think after 2 years rehab you deserve a bit of hope - good luck getting him to a nice day out and a cruise around a test he can manage.

 

[cptrayes]

None of the bad riding anyone has described on here has happened because low level affiliated competition has been introduced. It always used happen at local events.

Lower levels were introduced so that the organisations could get more revenue and it's been exceptionally effective for BE and BS and a nice money earner for BD.

Whatever level is the lowest level of competition, some people will always do it with too little training.

And khalzwitz, you belong to the oddest Riding Club I have ever heard of. None of the ones around here would put forward incompetent teams who all get eliminated for events, or allow incompetent riders to endanger themselves or others in a dressage warm up arena.

Yes, I see plenty of 'bad' riding. But I don't assume that person has the money, time, ability to do anything about it, and frankly, if it's simply their choice not to learn, what business is it of anyone else's if the horse isn't being abused? In general, I find people who plod along doing the same thing as always much more content than the ones striving constantly for the next goal.

 

[be positive]

I think after 2 years rehab you deserve a bit of hope - good luck getting him to a nice day out and a cruise around a test he can manage.[/QUOTE]


Thank you, we live in hope and aiming for an intro test is the target for now, vet said he would not come sound so we are already ahead of the game, then at least there is something to aim for, horse is of the opinion that dressage is pointless he is aiming to get back showjumping which is looking to be a possibility but dressage is safer for now and more realistic.

 

[FellOutOfFavour]

This popped up on my FB feed this morning, and is somewhat relevant to this discussion.
http://dressagecurmudgeon.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/i-feel-just-like-forrest-gump-only-more.html?m=1
As both a piss poor runner and a disastrous dressage diva I totally agree with her observations on the running and riding communities.

 

[lynds81]

I think it is a completely different issue doing an Intro as a warm up level to using any other level as a warm up class. Intro classes are walk and trot only. They were designed for people and horses who simply aren't ready to do a Prelim, to allow them the experience of competing and possibly getting a frilly, not for people who can't (or even worse, can) win a Prelim and want to win something.

I don't care whether it's within the rules or not (and at the centre I go to it's not) , I think it's pot hunting and bad manners to compete in an Intro if you and your horse have the competence to do a Prelim.

But then the first time I take my 4yo old out I plan to do both... Largely so the first time in white boards he might not buck me off in canter!!

He can do a Prelim test quite comfortably at home, and I expect will do one on his first outing as well as a W&T but IMO I don't see how this is bad manners, or unacceptable behaviour.

 

[Caol Ila]

This popped up on my FB feed this morning, and is somewhat relevant to this discussion.
http://dressagecurmudgeon.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/i-feel-just-like-forrest-gump-only-more.html?m=1
As both a piss poor runner and a disastrous dressage diva I totally agree with her observations on the running and riding communities.

Dressage Curmudgeon is my favourite blogger. I love her observations. And in that post, she is spot on. Are people in the running community saying, "Unless you can do a marathon in less than three hours, you should not even be there! And lets get rid of those half-marathons. It just encourages people to not train hard enough." Um.... I doubt it.

 

[cptrayes]

But then the first time I take my 4yo old out I plan to do both... Largely so the first time in white boards he might not buck me off in canter!!

He can do a Prelim test quite comfortably at home, and I expect will do one on his first outing as well as a W&T but IMO I don't see how this is bad manners, ormacceptable behaviour.

And neither do I and I never said it was, so is your reply aimed at me or someone else?

I think it's exactly the situation that Intro was invented for. You currently have no idea if your horse is capable of doing a decent prelim under test conditions and your plan to do both is a good one.

 

[cptrayes]

This popped up on my FB feed this morning, and is somewhat relevant to this discussion.
http://dressagecurmudgeon.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/i-feel-just-like-forrest-gump-only-more.html?m=1
As both a piss poor runner and a disastrous dressage diva I totally agree with her observations on the running and riding communities.

Spot on, thanks for that

 

[Tiddlypom]

There will always be those who have lesser ambitions, and I fully agree that they should be catered for. I remain unconvinced, however, that Intro was a necessary addition, Prelim is IMHO the more appropriate base line.

I do have issue with the ridiculously high marking of many low level UA tests. By all means go out and compete, but if your test is poorly ridden on a stiff, untrained, hollow horse how on earth should competitors be rewarded with results in the 60% range? (Btw, this is not aimed at anyone on here who may have posted videos up, it is a general observation).

Are the judges and trainers in cahoots in rewarding an utterly substandard test with falsely flattering comments? The full range of marks are there to be used. How on earth are competitors meant to evaluate their performances if they are deluded into believing that they are on the right lines?

I am so lucky that I had a trainer (the late Julie Basil BHSI) who was an absolute stickler for getting the basics right. She could encourage you forward from a very low base line (and we were properly rubbish when we started with her) but we always knew what we were aiming for.

 

[eahotson]

There will always be those who have lesser ambitions, and I fully agree that they should be catered for. I remain unconvinced, however, that Intro was a necessary addition, Prelim is IMHO the more appropriate base line.

I do have issue with the ridiculously high marking of many low level UA tests. By all means go out and compete, but if your test is poorly ridden on a stiff, untrained, hollow horse how on earth should competitors be rewarded with results in the 60% range? (Btw, this is not aimed at anyone on here who may have posted videos up, it is a general observation).

Are the judges and trainers in cahoots in rewarding an utterly substandard test with falsely flattering comments? The full range of marks are there to be used. How on earth are competitors meant to evaluate their performances if they are deluded into believing that they are on the right lines?

I am so lucky that I had a trainer (the late Julie Basil BHSI) who was an absolute stickler for getting the basics right. She could encourage you forward from a very low base line (and we were properly rubbish when we started with her) but we always knew what we were aiming for.

Lack of basic training is a big problem IMHO with the riding in this country (and maybe abroad for all I know).My little neice of 5 has started riding lessons at a BHS riding school.First lesson.First time sat on a pony.Walk yes?? NO rising trot.Second lesson beginning jumping.Albeit being let over a very tiny cross pole.I do realize you have to make it interesting but not at the expense of basic teaching surely? I had been riding (after a fashion I suppose) for some years when I met one of my best trainers.Hec wouldn't let me canter for at least 2 months if not more.Most of my early lessons were in walk with a little trot while we worked on my then non existant seat.
Perhaps the clubs could do some training sessions aimed squarely at the walk/trot people.This will hopefully help them to raise their stakes in the basics, gain some confidence in their abilities and hopefully move on to more training perhaps aimed at the moving on to prelim groups.Competition would be a good aim and focus for improvement then.

 

[eahotson]

From the moaning that often goes on on this forum about the standard of riding at 90, it's probably almost as applicable! Specifically regarding jumping and XC rather than dressage, the 'have a go' mentality of the lowest levels does encourage people to attempt them when they may not be ready. The RCs encouraging riders at that height without having done a few BEs at least I feel was a bit irresponsible, but ultimately the fact that they run affiliated events over these small heights makes the step into eventing seem easy, so when faced with tougher courses (esp at unaff venues like the one where the qualifier was run, which can be lots tougher than be) they don't have the skills to ride, say, a sunken road, or a half coffin, or an owl hole, or a double of skinnies (all of which were in that course).

Entering eventing at Novice, as in the old days, meant those skills had to be there at the outset, whereas with the simplification of courses in grassroots, they don't - and a championship or qualifying course (one girl I know wins regularly at 90 and has been eliminated multiple times at Badminton after qualifying, for example, and is therefore reluctant to move up) comes as a shock.

I probably come off as being a right bitch, but it's not that I don't think people should be encouraged, but I think with the downwards expansion of competition hasn't necessarily followed through with training IMO...

And I don't say this as someone looking down - I say this as someone who has really struggled, and having now finally actually started to improve and get on the right track, I see how little the system helped...

I do see where you are coming from here.With your present knowledge and experience what do you think can be done to help people progress?

 

[EquiEquestrian556]

Yes, I see plenty of 'bad' riding. But I don't assume that person has the money, time, ability to do anything about it, and frankly, if it's simply their choice not to learn, what business is it of anyone else's if the horse isn't being abused? In general, I find people who plod along doing the same thing as always much more content than the ones striving constantly for the next goal.

^^ Agree with this.

 

[Rollin]

Spot on, thanks for that

I don't do dressage but that was a wonderful read.

 

[TheoryX1]

Well, what an interesting thread this is. Firstly, I for one dont care a dam about who does what in what class. Life has taught me there is always somebody better than me in every activity in life, I just have to work harder to make myself better, nobody is going to do it for me. I am reading this for what its worth as a happy hacker with a semi retired old cob, who is wanting to buy a younger horse next year to do some BD on. Of course I will start with intro, but as soon as we start getting decent scores, we will move on up. I dont care how long it takes and I am not scared of competing with the big boys either. OK, I will get more than a few wobbles over it, the type my daughter gets over going into do BE Novice test after WFP, but I have as much right to be there as anyone else, I will have paid my money and done my prep work, so I am going to do as well as I can.

Oh and yes to the cheesy chips -yum yum. Roll on the eventing season, but myself and a friend have found some excellent competition venues that serve them, can even give you marks out of ten if you want. Oh yes, I am just about post menopausal, gone through without too many hitches, so I guess I must stay in Intro classes -lol - not on your life, I am as competitive in life generally as I am in my career. If new pony and I are good enough, we will go as far as we can - why on earth not? Thats always been my philosophy in life. Will even buy some bling and matchy matchy as well. Goodness, I thought I would never say that, but if I have a posh enough pony who it looks nice on, why not?

 

[JoJo_]

To add: not just because it was 75cm, but because people regularly jumping and doing well at 70cm unaff didn't understand the difference between simple courses with few fillers and spreads, and an up to height, up to width qualifying course with lots of fillers, and then didn't have the skills to ride it. That could still happen at bigger heights, but by then most people have learned some more skills that they can use when they find themselves out of their depth.

The same happened at our RC HT qualifiers, where the entire 80 team failed to get round (3/4 falling off) because they didn't realise the difference between going for a jolly at 80cm over some XC fences and round a simple course, and an 80cm qualifier for a big championship, that was up to height and width and technical. One girl wound up in hospital.

In dressage, it doesn't get dangerous in the same way, but that still doesn't excuse the dumbing down IMO

Tbh area 22 HT was hardly a big championship. It wasn't even a BE course. What made it difficult was that the xc course was linking fences together which were very close and somewhat technical combinations for an 80 as all the organisers had to play with was a training venue. It's was all jump jump jump instead of jump canter stretch jump canter stretch like a be80.

IMO it was too tricky for the level which isn't the competitors fault. All my RC team got round and none of them had done BE before as I didn't select anyone who had never done an unaffil event before so I knew they were capable. Either the next qualifier should be at a more suitable venue where an easier course can be put together or your RC should assess capabilities before entering a team.

Eta sorry I read that wrong. It was a qualifier for a big championship.

 

[khalswitz]

Tbh area 22 HT was hardly a big championship. It wasn't even a BE course. What made it difficult was that the xc course was linking fences together which were very close and somewhat technical combinations for an 80 as all the organisers had to play with was a training venue. It's was all jump jump jump instead of jump canter stretch jump canter stretch like a be80.

IMO it was too tricky for the level which isn't the competitors fault. All my RC team got round and none of them had done BE before as I didn't select anyone who had never done an unaffil event before so I knew they were capable. Either the next qualifier should be at a more suitable venue where an easier course can be put together or your RC should assess capabilities before entering a team.

Eta sorry I read that wrong. It was a qualifier for a big championship.

That's my point though - BE has simplified eventing for BE80's, and now a lot of the typical types of jumps seen at unaff (ie, generally older style, so more technical combinations with a lot of full up and full width fences for the height) are actually too tough for people who think they are succeeding at that level.

Personally, I don't think it was too tough - for people aiming to go to Champs, the qualifier should be tougher than a BE, or we end up with the same scenario as Be has with Badminton Grassroots, were the regional finals are relatively straightforward and Badminton seems a million miles tougher once you finally get there. If some of the failed combinations at qualifiers had had a more simplified course and qualified, how do you think champs would have gone?? However, I think what people *expect* has been simplified, and that makes it impossible to approach a qualifier or a champs with any degree of understanding of what you're facing.

I'll be the first to say we are massively rethinking our selection process after this. But that fact that neither the committee nor the competitors considered it is very telling IMO. Our feedback from our 80 and 90 riders (and our 90 riders qualified and went to champs, where they did well, but all were well established at 90 with some 100 runs under their belts too) were that the course was tough compared with BE of the same height, with a lot of tough fences with no alternatives. I was fence judging at the trakehner to roll top on the hill combination, and watched so many solid 90 combinations result in falls (and one horse temporarily in the ditch) because people just weren't approaching with the right canter and with the right line. These are important skills to learn and be teaching your horse about outside of the competition environment - it may not be required at Grassroots for the competition, but it's still something people should be learning, same as how in dressage we compete the level below we work.

Again, apologies if I sound like an elitist bitch, especially as I would have nowhere to stand myself, but I have been so frustrated over the lowering of standards that leads to succeeding at low levels with no understanding of where you're going wrong when you try to step up and fail abysmally without the fundamentals in place that, without the lowest levels, you would have to ensure were in place before you started.

 

[Maesfen]

Again, apologies if I sound like an elitist bitch, especially as I would have nowhere to stand myself, but I have been so frustrated over the lowering of standards that leads to succeeding at low levels with no understanding of where you're going wrong when you try to step up and fail abysmally without the fundamentals in place that, without the lowest levels, you would have to ensure were in place before you started.

It's not bitchy at all from where I'm standing!
I agree that the BE 80 has done wonders for the coffers of BE but it's done very little to improve the standard, particularly those that only stay in their safe zone and don't want to step up the classes. Years ago, you strived to become good enough to not disgrace yourself to go affiliated which meant that your learnt the ropes and had a better grounding by using the unaffiliated classes as a school ground; far better than any grounding you see today in spite of the fact that most now have trainers/instructors as the norm to put some polish on. Either those trainers/instructors are failing miserably and should be avoided like the plague or their pupils need many a kick up the backside to get themselves good enough to even think about competing. If it's a case of the pupil doesn't want to know or accept how bad they are but nobody dare tell them then it's a sorry state of affairs if they're not humble enough to accept criticism and that nobody is man enough to tell them. Nobody minds anybody learning on the job )as long as they are not a danger to their horse or others) but some just don't learn from their mistakes and make the same silly errors time and time again which BE 80 lets you get away with because it's not of a decent enough standard to instil respect in the course.

 

[Shantara]

Not read the whole thread, but just come to chip in about whether or not Intro is needed - it is for someone with a gaited horse!
There is NO way I could ride a Prelim on Ned and expect to finish. He doesn't canter correctly and for what I do, I don't need him too and at 15, I think it'd be almost impossible to teach him a good enough canter to compete.
I had great fun doing an Intro on him, because he has a good walk and a good trot (when he's relaxed) so I figured I'd give it a shot! We came 1st on our first test and 3rd on our second
I think Intro is great for people who want to have a go and maybe don't have the horse for anything higher. If I wanted to move up the dressage ladder, I would have bought a dressage horse. I just did it for something else to do.

 

[HorsesandParrots]

I also have a gained horse! ! I would not be able to do anything more than intro on her either, as she cannot canter properly! X

 

[Shantara]

Woo! High-five for fellow gaited horse owner

 

[HorsesandParrots]

Haha. Just realised I put gained not gaited* mines a rescue trotter cross she's ace! X