Not suitable for a novice - what's that mean these days?

[Sleipnir]

If I had to, I'd say that both of my horses are "not suitable for novices", but for different reasons. Please also note that English is not my first language, so up to now, for me, a novice meant "beginner", but I guess it actually stands for a certain, defined level of riding skills?

Mt eldest is not really a beginners' ride as he can get quite stubborn and heavy in the hand if he feels that the rider lacks focus, as well as he can throw in an occasional excited buck when out hacking. But as long as the rider is focused and competent, you couldn't find a more honest and willing horse than him.

My youngster is just that - a youngster. He's just recently backed, still very green, will sometimes spook at the most random stuff and needs a calm and experienced rider to lead him through his insecurities. With time, I'm sure he'll become a trustworthy ride, but right now a beginner would be a disastrous choice for him.

 

[teacups]

If I had to, I'd say that both of my horses are "not suitable for novices", but for different reasons. Please also note that English is not my first language, so up to now, for me, a novice meant "beginner", but I guess it actually stands for a certain, defined level of riding skills?

No, you are correct in terms of the english language meaning but you’ve put your finger on the problem. That is what it usually means: if you say you are a novice at most types of activity, you are saying you are a beginner and only just learning.

In horse riding though, it is also common to distinguish between ‘beginner’ and ‘novice’ as per OP’s post, roughly. I say roughly because at that point everyone has a different opinion about the exact extent of ‘novice’. Added to that, an awful lot of people in the horse riding world will also use the term novice to mean absolute beginner, and it all leads to confusion! Which also means I have to add that this is just how I see it ; )

 

[LEC]

The disasters in horse owning that you read are always from people who are highly nervous, novice, or think they are better than they are and either haven’t been triaged by the owner who took the money or by the time they get it home they have made countless mistakes and the horse can’t cope.

I am not interested in someone screwing up the horses I have put so much time and effort into, in a couple of weeks, then demanding I have it back because they have screwed it up.

 

[MiJodsR2BlinkinTite]

If I saw that in an advert ,I would take it to mean can be a handful/ bad behaviour. It always puts me off.

^^^ Mmmmhhh TBH I'd far rather people were honest. I've seen horses described as a "real Christian" (seriously) - I mean, whaddya expect, for it to rock-up at church, say its prayers & tell its Rosary??

My little gypsy mare is a real sweetheart, have had her since she was just-backed as a 4yo and as an older rider I trust her implicitly, but I'm not sure whether I'd describe her as a novice ride simply because she is a forward-going punty little coblet and that might scare someone who isn't expecting it. On a Fun Ride she's certainly not one of the ploddy Dope on a Rope brigade! She's also good at reading her rider and seeing just how much she can get away with! Yet she's actually as safe as houses. I think the problem is that people confuse "forward going" with "not a novice ride".

To me, if I see something described as "not a novice ride" I would expect there to be an issue of some kind; whether that be behavioural or simply because it is a very complex horse, or even one that is very fit & forward and would simply frighten a beginner/novice - it doesn't need to be "bad" behaviour.

 

[Lexi 123]

A lot of people don’t want to sell to there houses people out of a riding school or a happy hacker/ non competitive rider . It doesn’t have a behavioural meaning anymore is just sellers not wanting to sell to certain people . I know a breeder who wouldn’t sell to happy hackers or non competitive riders as there young horses were better than that. They put not suitable for a novice on there ad to stop these people from viewing.

 

[SantaVera]

could mean that the horse just needs a bit more schooling and or work ,maybe its been in the field for a while unridden. on the other hand could mean its a total fruit loop and dont touch with a batgew pole and anything inbetween.

 

[Glitter's fun]

could mean that the horse just needs a bit more schooling and or work ,maybe its been in the field for a while unridden. on the other hand could mean its a total fruit loop and dont touch with a batgew pole and anything inbetween.

Exactly - the term is completely meaningless! People mean different things by "novice" for a start & then there are so many reasons for not being suitable.

At one end of the scale, if I was selling my lovely share, Tommy (God forbid!), you'd have to say he is "not suitable for a novice" because he refuses to cooperate at all with anyone who swings kicks at him. He doesn't harm them - just stands stock still or if they really kick he goes backwards. However he goes very sweetly for a lopsided old lady with a dodgy knee and is as near to 100% bombproof as exists.

Somewhere in the middle, G was "unsuitable for a novice" because her brakes weren't great in company & you needed to sit the odd spook when she was fresh/bored.

The same words can mean "not suitable for anyone because he has a long established rearing habit and will eventually kill someone".

 

[PeterNatt]

Some horses are highly reactive and not only react to certain things but have also learned evasions to them such as Bucking, Rearing, Bolting etc., which it may or may not be possible to cure them of. These horses are not suitable for nervous or novice horse riders and stating a horse is not suitable for a nervous rider will prevent both parties from wasting their time.

 

[nikkimariet]

I deem it less of a term aimed at the rider but more at the horse. Riders cross into all sorts of grey areas over different disciplines and beginners have skills in some where very good riders may not etc.

A horse not for a novice ride = may react quickly, may over react quickly, you might have to be the boss occasionally, could make the wrong person cry.

To me doesn’t scream a bad horse either, just something that’s switched on. I know plenty of lovely horses that don’t bat an eye at much but they can’t half have an opinion when they need to. (And usually when it’s not required!).

 

[SEL]

Most of the time I think it's because it's either young or forward (or both)

Technically the microcob should be ok for a novice and I've had young kids on her, but I'd still be careful about selling her to a novice because she's quite feisty and opinionated.

 

[Alwaysmoretoknow]

Maybe because they don't want to sell their horse to someone who self-identifies as a novice rider on the assumption that their horse knowledge/ stable management skills are on a similar level and they may take the horse to a DIY or private yard/field where there is no experienced oversight.

 

[rara007]

I’m not a novice by most definitions but would still be put off by that in an advert!

 

[shanti]

When I was buying last year, 90% of ads stated, 'not suitable for novice riders'. I called some of them and my first question was always why? Responses were extremely varied and included;
'Horse bolts when he has a nervous rider onboard'
'Horse fidgets when mounting'
'Is green broke'
'Forward when off property'
'Spooks'
'Needs to be ridden daily as bucks after a few days off'

And my favorites; 'Is a mare' and 'Runs around in the paddock'

 

[lme]

When I last looked it seemed varied but ‘not novice ride’ generally meant one or more from too young, too talented, too responsive, too sharp, quirky, argumentative.

I am neither a novice nor what I would consider a good rider (more reasonably competent with decent feel and a few physical limitations) and some of those would be an issue for me, others less so.

 

[05jackd]

I always think this is a tough one and one of the many reasons I hate selling horses.

I personally would not want to sell any of my horses to a 'novice' as I would worry about their level of knowledge to look after them as well as their riding ability. Having said that I do have to 'competent novices' come and ride but I would not say they are good enough to deal with any 'problems' such as napping or spooking. I would say a novice should competently be able to handle a RS type horse in all paces.

 

[Lucky Snowball]

I think it’s used as a ‘get out clause’ . If the purchaser has any issues the vendor will imply that purchaser can’t ride or is a novice owner.