Evaluating a show jumper

volatis

volatis

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 May 2007
Messages
4,017
Location
Warwickshire, England
www.volatis.co.uk
Interested to hear whether we in the UK have the right systems for evaluating young jumping prospects.

I've been a little surprised at the futurity so far that they dont ask any of the 3yos to jump any real height. Do you think you can judge a young horses scope and bravery over a grid of smaller fences? Is it enough to just judge technique and brains? Does sending a horse down a line of big fences proven anything once it is under saddle?

The stallion gradings I have watched in Germany send all the colts down a decent line of fences, even those that ar strong dressage prospects. The ones that show a bit of extra appitiude go down again over a very decent sized final fence.
Last year at the Trakehner breed show, we won the loose jumping with Portia (a 2yo) and the German judges had her over a very decent sized oxer in the end, far bigger than anything horses were asked to jump at the Futurity.

Just interested to know what people think about the two different approaches. Can you tell enough over 1m, do big fences really prove anything?
 
going abroad a lot to buy, i think the difference in approach may lie (and ill prob get shot for this!) with how professionally the horses are produced from a jumping perspective in the uk (not all of them tho!!). here, like it or not, people do look down on jumping a young horse over a decent fence, and less people do it i find, so we arent as good at it! in holland, even the smallest classes at the local farmer shows are 1m plus and they loosejump big, earlier, to see what can and what cant! but yes, i prefer mine to jump something decent, but not often enough to damage growing joints etc. iv found some jump very nicely over 80 / 90 cms, but dont shine above that, which is no use! or, some just dont show a natural shape unless its big enough to make a real effort and actually bother leaving the ground.
i think the futuritys are right to err on the side of caution though as it is a young horse evaluation which is open to everyone, not for eg, a stallion grading, and at least its not bottling youngsters early on at shows, however, perhaps they might consider the final fences to be set at the handlers height to allow you to show your horse off? be nice to hear others opinions!
 
I think the thing with free jumping is IF the horse is suitable and prepared properly you don't have to jump a lot of jumps to get up to a decent height and see what you need to see. (I've seen LOTS of horses free jump 1.30+ in 3 or 4 trips down the chute with one of two schools at most.) In fact most people seem to think it's actually a bad idea to keep "practising" as the horse can end up less impressed/tired/over excited/stressed and end up actually jumping less than it's best.

BUT - and it's a huge one - that's not an option for horses in a strange place, possibly jumping for the first time ever and/or schooled and handled by people who aren't experienced loose jumping horses. It's very easy for something to go wrong.

From what I can gather this is often the case at the Futurities and I can see why they err on safety. So yes, in answer to your question, I would like to see horses jump at least a bit of a test - after all, scope is supposed to be one of the requirements - but I can see why, at this point, they don't do it. I'd rather find a way to make it possible for exceptional horses to show they're exceptional but I can see (after asking specifically about this subject) why the decision is not to push that point.

I do think, at the very least, all the horses should be presented with as consistent a test as possible in terms of distances, starting heights, incremental height increases, chute design etc. but I also think handlers should be able to ask for a horse to jump higher if they wish. Presumably people would have the sense not to ask unreasonable questions of their horses and to prepare properly for what they want to show.

I know there are people who think it's not necessary to free jump young horses in order to talent spot - that it should be obvious by conformation etc. - but extremely experience and successful people seem to feel differently. Perhaps some people can tell just by looking or jumping any sort of fence at all but many VERY experienced and successful people seem to feel a more practical test is essential to even start to assess potential.
 
I think the UK have not got the right education regarding the loose jumping of young horses. Having been to many KWPN gradings in Holland, seen the SSH gradings each year and also the SSH Loose jumping Championships I can safely say that not many people know how to educate their young horses correctly. The amount of horses that are not educated to go down a line of jumps or helped at home to get the striding right before these events is very high.

I have also seen many young horses balloon over small jumps, but when the jumps go up they lose the jump because they dont have the scope or technique to make the back rails (basically the jumps catch up on them). So can also say that some young horses may score higher over small jumps, but when it gets higher they are very poor jumpers.

You then need to think of the people behind the whips at these events. They have to have the knowledge to know when to slow down young horses or give them encouragement. Again the Europeans have this down to a fine art. At the KWPN Stallion Keurings they have about 8 people in the ring, and each know the job they have to do, with one single person in charge directing the rest, to make sure that the horse is given every chance to do the right job.

So I would be saying that unless you have prepared the young horse right, and you have experienced whips, then you could be asking for trouble by putting a big fence in front of a young horse. Because if they get a bad experience then you have a lot of undoing to do!
 
I might be talking tosh here but surely the technique of a showjumper can be evaluated over a fence of say, 90cm quite easily. Ok so that doesn't prove that they can jump 1m40 but the bascule and general approach, take off & landing style can be evaulated. It would be such a shame to push a young horse over higher fences just to prove that they can do it. IMO the risk of knocking confidence (not to mention joints!) is too high.

Too much too soon - I think the futurity team have got it right & if the evaluators are worth their salt (which of course they are!) then they should be able to judge a horse over a smaller fence.
 
The initial fences at the Futurity are very simple, usually two cross poles and an upright, and spookers are even allowed to be led through the lane with all the poles on the ground first. On each occasion, prior to sending the horse through, the handler is asked if they are happy with height and style of fence, and I haven't yet seen someone express concern, and I've been to a number of these over the last three years. The fences change slightly over (usually) four goes, to a steep cross pole, an upright and an oxer/parallel, with as much spread on the final fence as the evaluators feel is fair for the horse, aiming for a final fence of 1m.

What I HAVE seen is a lot of handlers and helpers who really haven't a clue how to manage their horses loose, let alone present them correctly for the jumping lane. There isn't a lot of point pushing beyond 1m what is seen by the evaluators as a badly prepared horse that is simply running on because someone is chasing it with a whip with a plastic bag on the end. Basculing, if the horse can even do it, seems to goes out of the window when flight sets in. Where a horse is well prepared for the lane, its level of ability is usually obvious by the second run through, and then confirmed over the final spread in the last run through. As the evaluators have already seen the horse loose in the arena, when it has (hopefully) had the chance to show all three paces and an ability to shorten, lengthen, turn in a balanced manner and think on its feet, I think that's as much as anyone can ask.

What the evaluators are scoring on is what they see on the day as the horse's potential provided it is nurtured and trained correctly. After all, it's only their opinion, and these events are NOT gradings, do not get set in concrete, and are intended as a guide from people who have sufficient experience, in the BEF's eyes, to know what they're talking about. The consultation panel who determine the rules and guidelines must feel that inherent ability can be seen over a maximum of 1m or surely they would ask for a greater finite height?

I'm not personally a fan of repetitively jumping three year olds, but I do think preparation is the key for these Futurity events, so that the horse can prove itself over anything that is put in its path.
 
The thing is. Most horses can show 'technique' over a small 90cm fence. 90cm is so small it takes no talent to jump it. So yes to evaluate show jumpers the fences should be higher.

If a horse is being presented as a show jumper it should have been prepared properly. Which should mean it can jump at least 1.10m down the grid as a 3 year old. If a horse is not brave, bold or talented enough to do that at 3 (with proper preparation of course) it does not have what it takes to reach the top of it's chosen sport, which is what the futurity is about. Breeding world class horses, not nice horses for pony club or local shows.

At the end of the day they only get 10 minutes in the ring, maybe proper evaluation of a show jumper can't really be done at the futurity. I do not take the futurity evalualtions too seriously, I saw it as an oppurtunity to get my horse out and about in a calm, relaxed environment. Of course I am proud of my horse's performance as I'm sure you all are. But as I said it is hard to really evaluate 3 yr olds in the current format.
 
Ladyfresha1 - very good point well made. I don't disagree with 1m10 for those who are prepared correctly and the point about bravery is very apt but IMO 1m30/40 is asking for trouble.

I do just feel that there is too much pressure on 3 & 4 yr olds to 'do more' which for the 'average' showjumper is too much. Maybe those who are exceptional should have the opportunity if they are well prepared but I don't think it should be the norm.
 
i dont like (imo) to see very young hrses jumping massive fences just 'to see if its scopey or not'(imagine the carnage if it isnt)(we know so much more these days about the damage and devlopment of young joints and strain of) a good experienced educated eye speaks volumes and wont need 140 oxers to be convinced of scope, at an auction i visisted recently the horses were asked to jump quite big and you could hear the people impressed by it, so i can understand why it sells!! but it wouldnt be for me or for a horse i wanted long term isnt just the height its brain and athletisism (sp)!!!
grin.gif


i think the futurity had it spot on!!
 
my stallion was prepared for grading by myself and geoff Luckett, one of his parting words to me as i went off was to not let them over face my ultra careful horse and that a good technique can be seen at 1m. So can the ability to judge the grid and how they learn from each approach. The balance they have as well as the use of the neck , back and legs . height is not so important it is about their technique and attitude .
My stallion got a 10 from one judge and two 9.5's and he really was a dressage horse. So i think good prep and handling were the key.
Take a leaf out of the book of the people that handled Spider for Bananaman they were fantastic. the young lad was German and they are taught how to 'run ' out horses from and early age, so yes there is a difference from the continent on that front and also it is not a grading there is a difference.
At the Futurities its a lottery as to how well the 3yr olds are produced so it is best to err on the side of caution but to be honest you can tell a lot on each of the runs as well as the free work before hand.You must not forget that the evaluators , at least one of them will be a specialist in either eventing or jumping, have undergone training and do actually have quite well developed 'eyes' interms of what they expect to see.
Lots of horses can jump height but they lack the athletic ability to cope with the more technical work later.that is why puisance horses tend to be specialist height horses the showjumpers are asked more questions than simply height.
I too think the Futurity does a pretty good job.
 
here in ireland loose jumping is HUGELY competitive - and most 3 year olds that come out of ireland have done these events. but we dont have futurity in ireland.

this was winner of comp in 2005 i think at cavan

normal height is 1.10m for the qualifier, and the more competition the higher the jumps to see what one is really the best.

goresbridge and cavan jump quite big when they loose jump - and look how successful the horses have been that came out of those sales.

what i hate about horses that loose jump however is that they can be extremely diffucult to ride to a fence - they either hate it so much after being chased to the fence that they refuse to jump or they run and launch themselves at the jump, or they think they know how to do it themselves and fight with the rider.

but it's looked on more favourably to loose jump a youngster here than in the uk!
tongue.gif
 
I 'm with Arwen and pinktiger on this one. You can get an idea of technique and attitude over a smalller fence. I am much more interested in what they do under saddle when they are a bit older. some horses are fantastic loose jumping then disappoint under saddle and vice versa. I worry about the implications of doing too much too soon on young joints.
What we have to remember is that the majority of these horses abroard are being produced to sell or stand at stud. Consequently those producing them for these sales and gradings etc don't have to worry about long term soundness.
 
Maybe I should rephrase my question slightly. I agree that you can't ask under prepared young horses to jump a fence that would be too much in terms of where they are in their current training. It is not fair on the horse and yes you can tell an awful lot about a horse's technique and brain from sending it down a lane of small fences. I don't disagree bwith that at all.

However can you award the very top awards - Elite and First premiums - without asking the horse a more serious question. Surely these awards are designed to highlight the potential Grand Prix horses, future international performers, and not (as Lady Fresha says) a riding club standard horse.

I just feel that the Futurity is trying to be two different things at the same time. It is offering a super relaxed non pressure environment in order for young British bred horses to be evaluated, BUT, it is also trying to promote a market place and shop window whereby serious buyers can rely on the evaluators awards as being an accurate indication of that horse's potential in that sphere.

We had a horse that was awarded a First Premium in the show jumping section. Now if I had him on the market, could I use that First Premium award to attract a buyer, with the buyer knowing that first premium award meant that horse really had the potential to go to a very highest level in the sport? Can I convince that buyer to spend their money here and not in Germany/Holland.
 
I don't think loose jumping goes to anything other than innate ability BUT no horse is ever going to jump better than it's mechanics - it's a measure of how well a horse MIGHT jump in the future - all going perfectly - not how well a horse WILL jump in the future.

That said, even a good horse can jump badly if it's not well presented etc. so it can easily become at least partly a test of preparation and circumstances.

I'm not sure that good jumpers can necessarily be picked out over small fences. I was reminded of this again at the Brightwell's auction where many horses were unimpressive - inattentive, a bit loose in front, not coming off the ground with power - over the first pass of 2'9" or so but then looked fantastic as the fence went up. So it depends a bit on what you're judging, once again.

I do think it is perfectly possible to affect a horse's long term jumping ability, particularly with regard to attitude, and some are, as mentioned, awful to jump u/s later because of it. But then it's also possible to use it to educate a horse during a very important developmental window. It's a tool like everything else - not good or bad in and of itself, only in how you use it.

I'd be interested in the proof of long term negative soundness implications for horses that free jump as young horses. I'm not saying it might not be the case, I just haven't seen any data. And considering so many successful modern showjumpers have come through either the grading or the auction systems it would stand to reason more have done some free jumping as young horses than not.

It is an important point that the Futurities serve a wide group of horses and riders, not just a pre-chosen elite group. I don't think it's valid though to think of free jumping as an attempt to prove how high a horse CAN'T jump. A practised evaluator shouldn't be putting the jumps up until the horse gets in trouble, he/she should be judging HOW the horse handles the questions not just whether or not it gets to the other side, and quitting whilst the horse is ahead.

I would still like to see horses that are coping easily at least have the opportunity, should their people wish it, to prove that they are exceptional and be rewarded accordingly. I don't think that's "unfair" I think it's part of developing a system to identify superior breeding programs producing horses of exceptional quality.

All that said, I can see why that's not necessarily an option right now and safety must be of paramount importance. I'd MUCH rather see a horse not offered the opportunity to show more than have other horses asked to show too much.
 
[ QUOTE ]

We had a horse that was awarded a First Premium in the show jumping section. Now if I had him on the market, could I use that First Premium award to attract a buyer, with the buyer knowing that first premium award meant that horse really had the potential to go to a very highest level in the sport? Can I convince that buyer to spend their money here and not in Germany/Holland.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Futurity system is deliberately based upon the Swedish system of young horse evaluations which uses non stressful analysis to identify potentail stars of the future and that is where its strength lies.

In 2006 the WBFSH held a seminar on assessing young jumpers and it was run by the Hannoverian Verband who made it clear from the very beginning that their loose jumping assessment was a pure marketing tool in which a horses strengths were identified and (certainly in the catalgue/sales video anyway) its weaknesses were completely ignored <sigh>. As the Swedes (Ingvar Fredricksen and Jan-Olaf Vannius) said at the time this is not an evaluation in the true sense of the word becuase all you end up with a horse that either jumps spreads or uprights spectacularly but can't actually put both together when required (ie cope with varying demands).

The Swedes always do everything thoroughly and the way they introduced top class Holstein jumping blood into their breeding programme with such skill in the mis and late 1990s is a lesson to us all not to go for the short dazzling impact but the overall picture -- including most importantly the way the horse handles itself in the spaces between the fences and learns by the experience.

I have seen too many horses messed up in grading grids in this country when the judges who had no European experience did not believe a horse could jump high until they overfaced it too much and shattered its nerve or casued it to strain itself, to even suggest that bigger grids are the answer to this. More preparation yes -- but without stress in training -- would make it easier for the evaluators I do agree but of we are talking about protecting the soundness of mind and body of a horse that could be a potential top class performer in 5 or 6 years then I for one go for other criteria than a crude high jump competition.

BTW when I was in the USA a few years ago I saw a stallion jump 6ft loose. He had been the loose jumping champion of South Australia but had never cleared a fence under saddle which I think says it all!
 
There are so many things to take in to account in a discussion like this. Most things with horses go back to "how much is too much" and how do you find this out.

As it has been said horses need so many different things to make a good show jumper, scope, care, the ability to learn, a trainable temprement, balance etc etc etc. I think most of these are judgeable at the futurity but scope is different. Scope can mean different things. Scope loose, scope under saddle.

I think the futurity fences should be higher. At the stallion grading I will be attending the fences will be a max of 1.10m for 3 yr old, I do not know if this is a standard across all breed societies. I don't think they need to be higher than this at this age but I do think 1m is a little too small. They have to jump 1m in four year old classes with the added weight of a rider on their backs. I hate to see two and three year olds jumping 1.50m fences, just look on youtube!

Back to the orignal post - how high was a 'decent size fence'?
 
Just hoping we could have an interesting discussion on this as there are plenty of arguements for and against. Be nice if ken might join in as jumping is his forte and he sees first hand how they produce horses in Europe.

I dont want to see any 3yo sent over an enormaus fence but I am not sure jumping a 1m ascending oxer with a very small spread can identify 'potential elite international horses for British riders', which is aim 1 of the Futurity series. And to me, that is what the top awards should be given out for.

I want the Futurity to be able to identify the pinacle of British breeding without burying the lesser horses or their owners. But I confess I am not convinced the top awards are being handed out to horses, that you can confidently say are potential elite international horses. And as a breeder I want to be able to say to buyers hand on heart that if they buy my foal with an X premium, that stands for X, eg a 1st premium equals a youngster with a serious competitive future
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


BTW when I was in the USA a few years ago I saw a stallion jump 6ft loose. He had been the loose jumping champion of South Australia but had never cleared a fence under saddle which I think says it all!

[/ QUOTE ]


well said ciss, ( hope your feeling ok)
 
[ QUOTE ]
Just hoping we could have an interesting discussion on this as there are plenty of arguements for and against. Be nice if ken might join in as jumping is his forte and he sees first hand how they produce horses in Europe.

I dont want to see any 3yo sent over an enormaus fence but I am not sure jumping a 1m ascending oxer with a very small spread can identify 'potential elite international horses for British riders', which is aim 1 of the Futurity series. And to me, that is what the top awards should be given out for.

I want the Futurity to be able to identify the pinacle of British breeding without burying the lesser horses or their owners. But I confess I am not convinced the top awards are being handed out to horses, that you can confidently say are potential elite international horses. And as a breeder I want to be able to say to buyers hand on heart that if they buy my foal with an X premium, that stands for X, eg a 1st premium equals a youngster with a serious competitive future

[/ QUOTE ]



do you doubt this system simply because of the height of the grid????? and if a horse could jump a 110120 grid on that day hes a showjumper,, i have a friend who has an FEI showjumper, jumps 130s for a laugh cant loose jump for toffee!!!!!
 
Well said Volatis! If we are looking to improve british breeding we should only be awarding top premiums to horses that show themselves to be fully deserving of them. I have not seen all of the horses that have attended but from the ones I have seen, albeit only in pictures in some cases, I do think that some horses have been graded higher than they should have been and equally some who should have gained higher marks. It has been rumoured that there may be some credentials lacking, ie a working hunter judge as an evaluator?? I do not know if this is true but if Futurity is trying to improve british breeding a W/H judge is not going to do that! Anyway that is a whole different debate and as I said just a rumour!

Sorry to be moving away from the original question.

Yes, if the horse can clear a 1.10m grid on that day and do it displaying all of the things previously discussed, it is a show jumper. Evaluations last 10 minutes including 6 runs down a jumping lane. That is all that it can be judged on. The futurity evaluations are about spotting potential. It does not guarante the horse will reach it of course. But if they aren't born with it. You can't make a star!
 
pinktiger, I should hope an FEI show jumper could jump 130 easily, thats not the point?
I am mearly asking if the method we are using here in the UK to assess potential top class show jumpers (ie the ones that are being awarded the very highest scores) can select/highlight true international potential versus the continential method of putting them over much bigger fences.

Maybe neither method works and until the horse is under saddle no one can say if it truely has it what it takes.

I am just trying to get a discussion going around the premise that the Futurity's first aim listed on the BEf website is to identify 'potential elite international horses for British riders'. I'd love a rider who is looking to purchase a GP prospect to be able to join in and say whether they would be influenced in their decision to buy based on a loose jumping score. Does anyone know if the loose jumping compeitions in Ireland that are so popular, have produced any top class jumpers, or wheter it works as a shop window for breeders
 
[ QUOTE ]
It has been rumoured that there may be some credentials lacking, ie a working hunter judge as an evaluator? I do not know if this is true but if Futurity is trying to improve british breeding a W/H judge is not going to do that! Anyway that is a whole different debate and as I said just a rumour!

[/ QUOTE ]

As usual with most rumour, this is grossly misinformed / inaccurate <sigh>

I think Cindy Sims may judge working hunters sometimes but she is first and formost a former international event rider (possibly better known under her maiden name of Lucinda Moir) and it is possible that Bridget Parker does judge the occassional working hunter class too (although I have never seen her do this) but she was on the Olympic short list for eventing in Los Angeles and is a team selector for these Games as well as being a style and performance judge for the BSJA. Yogi Breisner is also one of the evaluator trainers (any criticism you can think about his qualifications guys? I'm sure he'd be interested to hear them <ROFL>) and as we are looking not only for potential showjumpers but uniquely IN THE WORLD (ie even the Swedes don't do it this way yet) also for potential international eventers, natural bascule and the way the horse copes with the intervals is a vital key for the scores. A flatter bascule and a natural (not learnt) ability to jump off a longer stride indicates an eventer -- but for a top horse it has to be supported by almost wb paces to score the 45 or lower dressage score that is Yogi's aim in international championships -- whilst a rather more rounded one is necessary for showjumping plus neatness and great snatch up back and front.

A call for height, height, height might be a great crowd pleaser but is neither a help for the long term development of the horse (and the Futurity is part of the BEF Long Term Equine Development Programme) nor its welfare and as a BEF series the welfare of the horse is always paramount in everything as it is all FEI-linked activity. Nor does it actually add much information that the evaluators need to know. And if you are breeding and selling eventers and sjs then you should perhaps enlighten your customers about what the real priorities are that they should look for in a potential horse for such a sport, not assume that the evaluators don't know just becuase you may not have seen it done exactly that way before!

Sorry, off soap box now as my arm is hurting (shouldn't actually be typing at all ATM) but this ill-informed muttering about the credibility of the evaluators is beginning to irritate me.
 
I totally agree with you Ciss, it is starting to irritate me too!!!!!!!!!! From my experience of the evaluation I attended at The Grange, all the evaluators were both professional and knowledgeable in their assessments.

My 3 year old Grannox filly had been schooled down the jumping lane (about half a dozen times), she knew exactly what to do and the evaluators were able to asses her, very accurately in my opinion, after just 4 runs. She finished on a fence at about 1.15, she showed all the scope to go higher, but the assessor came over to me and said that they were satisfied that they had seen enough and asked me if I wanted to show her a bigger fence. The whole point of her going down the line was so that the evaluators could do their job, so I replied, if you have seen enough, then she has done enough. After all it is not a loose jumping competition!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
In reply to Volatis's question, I personally do not like to see young horses over faced in the loose jumping lane, it only takes one over-facing fence to scare them, but the long term consequences could be disastrous. As was seen at the recent Addington sales, several of the babies were over faced and came out of the ring on a very bad note!!!!!!!!!

In my opinion, a horse does not jump the same loose as when it has a rider on board, it is completely two different scenarios for the horse. When you add the additional weight of a rider and the influence of a bit in the horses mouth, you have a completely different picture.

My daughters Wolfgang mare is a terrible loose jumper, but an amazing horse under saddle. On the other hand we had a very good loose jumping mare (1.60 no problem), who was a very difficult ride even around a 1 metre track!!!!!!

I use loose jumping as a guide to judge if a horse has a natural bascule, to see how quick they are in front and behind and to see if they naturally look for their stride, that can easily be done over a 1 metre fence.

Ridden jumping is a whole different ball game!!!!!!!!!!!
 
[ QUOTE ]
Well said Volatis! If we are looking to improve british breeding we should only be awarding top premiums to horses that show themselves to be fully deserving of them. I have not seen all of the horses that have attended but from the ones I have seen, albeit only in pictures in some cases, I do think that some horses have been graded higher than they should have been and equally some who should have gained higher marks. [ QUOTE ]


seems a bit unfair to demote/raise peoples awards just on pictures IMO,
 
[ QUOTE ]
pinktiger, I should hope an FEI show jumper could jump 130 easily, thats not the point?


[/ QUOTE ]


my point with that actually was the fact he is an international jumper and can not loose jump to save his life,and never has, he never came into his own until he was produced under saddle by the people who had experience and aptitude to create a fantasic showjumper! (without loose schooling) and i bet hes not the only one!
 
Ciss, please dont take my comments as an attack on the Futurity, as you know I am a big supporter and do my bit to drum up lots of support. I'm certainly not attacking any ones credentials as evaluators and don't want this discussion derailed into who is who.

I'm just interested in the different approach the Futurity is taking in evaluating potential show jumpers, and their search to highlight for the potential international stars, versus the approach taken on the contintent (from what I know of it). I am not querying anyones scores, this is not a personal attack on anyone, but 'hopefully' a mature and adult discussion on a discussion board, about how to evalute world class potential in young horses that are not yet under saddle.

As I have already said very clearly, I dont breed show jumpers, BUT, if I was to, and if i wanted to market that young horse on the back of its Futurity success, would the showjumper I was trying to sell my horse to have the confidence in the ranking system of the Futurity to pick out the potential stars.

I dont see why people are getting so defensive. The Futurity is in its infancy and I hope will become a major factor in British breeding, but its not perfect and I hope we can have sensible discussions about little aspects of it.
 
i think we need be careful when it comes to comparing our methods to those abroad. for a start the germans and dutch have been breeding and refining their breeds for much longer than we have therefore the horses that they evaluate are going to be much more advanced and their methods for preparing them will be much better. as time goes by and the breeds and methods evolve then more potential can be extracted from the horses allowing them to jump higher. as 3 year olds apart from the parentage it is one of the only ways of seeing the young horses potential at an earlier age rather than waiting until they are under saddle.

i know some horses dont loose jump very well and others that do aren't good under saddle but the correlations in some of the evaluations on the continent are hard to disagree with.

cornet obolensky won his 30 day testing in the jumping, had a top score of 10 in the loose jumping, as did balou be rouet, sandro boy was the only horse to complete his 100 day day test and got a 10 for jumping, berlin came second in his test behind acorado... the list is endless. diarado is a prime example, although he hasn't been proven in sport or breeding his pedigree and the potential he showed when loose jumping were enough to convince schockemohle, the holstein verband and Kiel J. van Uytert to spend a fortune on him.

at the end of the day it comes down to the owners willingness to push the horse, the ability of the horse and economics.

i also understand about the swedish model and how strict they are but if we want to follow the ultimate short term rise of a particular stud book then we must follow zangersheide. one mans dream has propelled Z to the front of showjumping and breeding methods. why dont we have an english Melchior? Paul Schockemohle? Bernard le Courtois? maybe things would be different if we did!
 
Volatis I know how big a supporter of the Futurity you are and my response to you was not meant to be overly defensive -- just explanatory -- so I hope that it helps. I have to say though that it was a deliberate response to the usual 'let's trash the evaluators' approach that others seem to have which is sadly used far too often as an easy alternative to the far more productive task of looking at your animal in the light of what the evaluators say and deciding how this can help your breeding, production and competition plans for the future.

With respect to your statement that:

[ QUOTE ]
As I have already said very clearly, I dont breed show jumpers, BUT, if I was to, and if i wanted to market that young horse on the back of its Futurity success, would the showjumper I was trying to sell my horse to have the confidence in the ranking system of the Futurity to pick out the potential stars.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the answer is more and more in the proof of the pudding, especially as the Berlin foal made such a high price last week and at yesterday's KWPN inspection a horse that was given v high marks at the Futurity and subsequently pretty welll slandered by some posters here when it did not find favour with one of the less successful books in the WBFSH, was described as just the sort of jumper we need today, given a ster pref for conformation / paces and told that it will have a ster pref for performance when it achieves 3 double clears at 1,30 (it is already jumping double clears 1.10/1.20 now at 4 years old). That is how accurate our system is already -- although doubtless it could be improved even more -- but higher and higher is not what it is all about and my argument is that is now up to successful Futurity breeders, as well as the BEF, to explain why that is the case to prospective customers.

[ QUOTE ]
I dont see why people are getting so defensive. The Futurity is in its infancy and I hope will become a major factor in British breeding, but its not perfect and I hope we can have sensible discussions about little aspects of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I say, I am only defensive about the quality and qaulifications of the evaluators, the philosophy behind the system and the continuing need to be governed by the welfare of the horse. The rest is in the rules and rules are meant to be updated and revised as the requirements of the FEI and the breeding industry world wide change.
 
Shout me down, if you like, but I have to say that I don't really approve of jumping 3 year olds at all, for any reason. I had been considering taking my current yearling to the Futurity as a 3 year old but when I read that they would be expected to jump a lane of fences, I'm afraid I changed my mind. It is stated that the horses should be trained to do this and no way am I having a 3 year old jumping on a regular basis in order to train it. Obviously I know they're not ridden but it is still concussion on young bones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top