Novices and Experienced Riders

[Celestica]

It seems that everybody has a different idea of what a novice rider is and what an experience rider is. What do you consider and a Novice or an Experienced rider yourself?

 

[Keimanp]

It depends in what discipline. We have Novice classes in most disciplines, if you compete, so if you are only able to ride in those classes or below then you could be considered a novice rider??

It could be until you have grasped the concepts of horse care and possibly basic riding (A novice horse owner doesn't have to ride?).

My personal view is that every single person on this board still has something to learn with regard horses whether that be ridden or just their care and until there is nothing left to learn or a situation not experienced then we all still have 'Novice' aspects.

As soon as something is learnt/experienced then you can be considered experienced in that, if that is riding I would say I am experienced in basic movements and struggle with more complex ones although with patience we both can achieve what we set out to do. I would say that I am experienced in a horse bucking/broncing and can normally sit and ride through it (cue me taking a fall at the next buck), but not with one that rears (properly).

Experience comes with exposure, 20 years being around A horse doesn't neccessarily mean you know more than someone who has been around multiple horses intensively for a shorter time period.

I know I have enough experience to know when to ask for help, in my mind that is better than me being put in a box

 

[Enfys]

Experience comes with exposure, 20 years being around A horse doesn't neccessarily mean you know more than someone who has been around multiple horses intensively for a shorter time period.

I know I have enough experience to know when to ask for help, in my mind that is better than me being put in a box

This

 

[PaddyMonty]

The terms Novice and Experienced only really work if used in comparison to some other standard. By that I mean if you asked how I would class myself against the average RS rider than I would answer Experienced. However, if you asked meto classify myself using the top Showjumpers as the bench mark then I'm probably not that far away from novice.

This gets even more confusing when you look at riding schools. They tend to group pupils as novice intermediate and advanced yet the most advanced group would probably only just be novice when compared to say the average BS rider.

So its all about where you set the base line or bar. Without that the terms are pretty useless.

 

[Echo24]

I would class a novice rider as someone who can ride the basics (walk, trot, canter, circles, etc) but to me, an experienced rider is someone who can ride a wide range of horses and still get the best out of them, something I certainly can't do but then I class myself as a novice rider!

 

[maresmaid]

I agree with JUNOXV there has to be a comparison. I've owned horses for 26 years and ridden for much longer than that. If I go to a riding school for a "holiday hack" I might say I was experienced (although I often don't admit exactly how much riding I have done). I've schooled and competed upto elementary dressage and would not class myself as a novice there, but if I went hunting (which I've never done) I would definately say I was a novice.

 

[Ibblebibble]

It depends in what discipline. We have Novice classes in most disciplines, if you compete, so if you are only able to ride in those classes or below then you could be considered a novice rider??

It could be until you have grasped the concepts of horse care and possibly basic riding (A novice horse owner doesn't have to ride?).

My personal view is that every single person on this board still has something to learn with regard horses whether that be ridden or just their care and until there is nothing left to learn or a situation not experienced then we all still have 'Novice' aspects.

As soon as something is learnt/experienced then you can be considered experienced in that, if that is riding I would say I am experienced in basic movements and struggle with more complex ones although with patience we both can achieve what we set out to do. I would say that I am experienced in a horse bucking/broncing and can normally sit and ride through it (cue me taking a fall at the next buck), but not with one that rears (properly).

Experience comes with exposure, 20 years being around A horse doesn't neccessarily mean you know more than someone who has been around multiple horses intensively for a shorter time period.

I know I have enough experience to know when to ask for help, in my mind that is better than me being put in a box

think this just about sums it up

 

[Super_Kat]

The terms Novice and Experienced only really work if used in comparison to some other standard. By that I mean if you asked how I would class myself against the average RS rider than I would answer Experienced. However, if you asked meto classify myself using the top Showjumpers as the bench mark then I'm probably not that far away from novice.

This gets even more confusing when you look at riding schools. They tend to group pupils as novice intermediate and advanced yet the most advanced group would probably only just be novice when compared to say the average BS rider.

So its all about where you set the base line or bar. Without that the terms are pretty useless.

What he said

 

[lhotse]

Well super-kat, we all know that you are the 'bar' by which all standards are set, by virtue of your extensive trophy cabinet, so I guess that makes me a complete novice after nearly 35 years!!

 

[Lolo]

What Juno said, but also a little more.

To me, experienced riders have exactly that- experience. I've ridden just as long as my sister, but from 13-18 rode only my horse. She has ridden whatever she can since she was 10 and so has a lot more experience than me.

I think that a very good book somewhere says it takes 100000 hours of good practise at whatever level to be able to be considered good and I'd agree with that. It's why the pros are better aside from natural talent- they ride a lot of horses well every day with frequent lessons with the best.

 

[madeleine1]

if you look at it the same way they they do the average salery they have a average for the footsie, ( no idea how i suppose to write or spell that) so the top earners would be earning say 3 million a year. and the top competetion riders would have the experiences, eg mary king, wittikers and so on and then the novices who have only done one or two of the top competions or one or two comps at the top.

then you have the rest of us with the nation average of incomes being 24 ish thousand (i am ruffly close). so people who can ride most things they are put on and can get a better tune out of a horse and compete successfully above the bottom few standards then most would be classes as experience altho you can have some people who are experienced but still at the lower levels because of horse or something else that gets in the way. most would class novice as someone who needs an easier horse or who have not had exposure to differant horses or has a horse who can compete higher but they cant out of ability not chose.

obviously there are problems with my definition and you can feel free to alter it but i think it tries to set a standard.

 

[Mince Pie]

This gets even more confusing when you look at riding schools. They tend to group pupils as novice intermediate and advanced yet the most advanced group would probably only just be novice when compared to say the average BS rider.

As a slight aside although on a similar vein, do you think that this grouping in RSs is responsible for first time buyers over estimating their ability? If they are in the 'advanced' group at their RS, they think they are an advanced rider if they have no outside experience for comparison?

 

[maresmaid]

As a slight aside although on a similar vein, do you think that this grouping in RSs is responsible for first time buyers over estimating their ability? If they are in the 'advanced' group at their RS, they think they are an advanced rider if they have no outside experience for comparison?

I think you might have a good point there. People who have ridden only riding school horses do not always understand that a non-riding school horse, ridden on a non-riding school situation is something altogether different from what thay have experienced.

I have sometimes accompanied my (novice) daughter on a "riding school hack" when we have been on holiday. I ride 5 times a week, my daughter rides 5 times a year at best! - she can walk , trot and canter on a well behaved horse fairly competantly, but when we have taken part in these rides my main concern is that she gets a sensible horse to ride so i don't say too much about my own ability.

There are ALWAY people there (usually a giveaway by their pristine riding boots and hat) who declare that they are "experienced" as they have had regular weekly lessons for 18 months or so, and have been jumping for two months and would like to go on the "Fast" 2 hour hack which must include a gallop, and they would like a "Fast" horse please!

I don't think the riding schools can be blamed though, would their "Riding-lesson-once-a-week" clients be happy to be classified as "Beginer" for 12 months or so, then "Novice" for the next few years while they rack up enough hours in the saddle to gain any kind of basic experience? We also live in a world where people seem to think that they must be "safe" at all times! Can riding schools really risk progressing their clients onto more challenging horses - who might spook on a hack, or pop a buck in after a jump? I suspect their "experienced" clients could well have a field day with the "No win, no fee" brigade!

 

[Celestica]

I think you might have a good point there. People who have ridden only riding school horses do not always understand that a non-riding school horse, ridden on a non-riding school situation is something altogether different from what thay have experienced.

I have sometimes accompanied my (novice) daughter on a "riding school hack" when we have been on holiday. I ride 5 times a week, my daughter rides 5 times a year at best! - she can walk , trot and canter on a well behaved horse fairly competantly, but when we have taken part in these rides my main concern is that she gets a sensible horse to ride so i don't say too much about my own ability.

There are ALWAY people there (usually a giveaway by their pristine riding boots and hat) who declare that they are "experienced" as they have had regular weekly lessons for 18 months or so, and have been jumping for two months and would like to go on the "Fast" 2 hour hack which must include a gallop, and they would like a "Fast" horse please!

I don't think the riding schools can be blamed though, would their "Riding-lesson-once-a-week" clients be happy to be classified as "Beginer" for 12 months or so, then "Novice" for the next few years while they rack up enough hours in the saddle to gain any kind of basic experience? We also live in a world where people seem to think that they must be "safe" at all times! Can riding schools really risk progressing their clients onto more challenging horses - who might spook on a hack, or pop a buck in after a jump? I suspect their "experienced" clients could well have a field day with the "No win, no fee" brigade!

This is my problem too, I've been riding for 6 years now but only in the past year moved to a very good school. It's a small school but from one week you could be riding a normal horse that could act up or you could be riding a classic chestnut thoroughbred mare or even a Liveries horse. I adore this yard as they really changed how you ride, even with the little six year olds you wouldn't see a Pony Club Kick out of them.

I do not feel experienced although I do feel it's giving me expereince I am comfortable in all paces, riding figures and circles,hacking and competed in Show jumping, dressage and cross country. I also have some first AID care and a lot of daily care knowledge although I don't have any experience with bringing on young horses who are green,even though I do ride a four year old cob who's a sweetheart so he doesn't count.

The fact that there's no set term for Experienced or Novice for riders really irritates me as for nearly every loan/sale ad it says 'For an experienced Rider'/'Not for a complete novice' so I ignore this, although I maybe ignoring the best possible horse for me! As a novice to them maybe someone who's only had a few lessons!

 

[Captain Bridget]

In the general scheme of things I'd probably be an intermediate rider, for the most part. I've ridden a wide variety of horses, including ex advanced eventers down to riding school plods. If I were to go on a riding school hack I'd say I was advanced because their level of horses is going to be the riding school end, whereas if I were going to a lesson on a schoolmaster I'd say I was intermediate, as in I can ride, have ridden for 12 years, can walk, trot, canter, gallop, jump, in the school and outdoors, and do some school movements, but have limited experience on that level of horse.

I think it's down to the level of horse that determines what level of experience you have. Of course if you are a novice you will be a novice, even when put on a novice persons horse because of the experience you have, or haven't, had. But if you've gained a bit more experience, class yourself as intermediate on a novice horse and are then moved onto a more advanced horse you may well drop down to novice level again as you learn how to ride this horse.

It is all a matter of gauging your level within certain areas, as others have said, either riding school level or top competition level, you'd be significantly different.

And with regards to riding school levels, having spent a lot of time at riding schools, one advanced group can be more advanced than others. Eg, the kids advanced vs adults advanced. We had a lot of mixture in our advanced adult group, some people I would have classed as novices because they bounced around on the horses back, sometimes couldn't steer properly and found simple questions such as diagonals and canter leads difficult. I think riding schools can give an inflated sense of level, and they need to explain this to people before letting them go out and buy their own horse or similar, but it's difficult without insulting someone's ability!

 

[Amaranta]

The terms Novice and Experienced only really work if used in comparison to some other standard. By that I mean if you asked how I would class myself against the average RS rider than I would answer Experienced. However, if you asked meto classify myself using the top Showjumpers as the bench mark then I'm probably not that far away from novice.

This gets even more confusing when you look at riding schools. They tend to group pupils as novice intermediate and advanced yet the most advanced group would probably only just be novice when compared to say the average BS rider.

So its all about where you set the base line or bar. Without that the terms are pretty useless.

^^^^^^ this

 

[MiJodsR2BlinkinTite]

Ditto above really; put very well.

I've been riding since I was seven (not saying how old I am now!!) - but because I've always had nice polite horses I personally wouldn't rate myself as an "experienced" rider at all TBH. I have confidence issues and know that were I offered a ride on a lot of horses I'd be positively *****ting myself!

I think it is impossible to judge really. The only thing I would use as a guide is maybe the sort of horse a rider has ridden AND been able to get the best out of. My boy can be a tad quirky at times and it was possible to see a marked difference between a rider who could work with that and still manage to get him to perform well and go in a nice outline, to someone who'd basically been to College and got the qualifications BUT he managed to buck her off twice in the same place and the same fashion!!! So I think that would be my definition of "experienced", basically someone for whom the majority of horses, even novice and/or just backed, or with issues etc, will go well for.

Whereas the "novice" will ALWAYS have problems with every horse they ride, usually the same ones but with different horses! - plus are unable to progress by learning from their mistakes and/or positive feedback from others, therefore will always remain "novices" and will never progress.

Sorry that's probably not very clear!

 

[Runaground]

I couldn't agree more with the above.

I wish people would realise that words are not precise, they are only ideas which are interpreted differently by everyone, as we all understand the world around us depending on our past life experiences.


I'm looking for my first horse having had several shares and part loans, I also ride once or twice a week at an exam centre with excellent tuition, but, find it impossible to decide what describes me best.
Having messed around on ponies as a child and then ridden properly for the last 4 years, I look at ads saying "not a novice ride" or needs "experienced rider" and just don't bother to phone anymore. Those I have called in the past have often stated things like, "oh he's very easy and has no issues, it's just that he's well schooled and I don't want him spoilt" or "he's responsive to the aids......no, no not sharp at all". Worse still on viewing one of these I've found said horse to be no more than average schooling wise, stiff, with no understanding of even basic lateral work, ( even allowing for my riding!)

Obviously, Mr bolting, rearing, charging fences neddy would not be a, "novice ride", I just wish people would say what they mean or better, say nothing until explaining on the phone if there are any issues.... Hence now not even bothering with any ad that uses such caveats.

Sorrry, rant over, but, using generalisations in advertising is so very unhelpful, this horse hunting lark impossible enough anyway!!!!!

 

[Marydoll]

I dont think id label peoples riding skills within the level they compete.
A good friend of mine who is a very experienced rider, has backed and produced youngsters that all debut at Novice event level with her, she then chooses to sell them on as she gets her thrills in the producing.
You can sit this girl on anything and she'd get a tune out of it, she also re schools and works with horses who are very challenging, that are usually a phonecall away from a dealer or the meat man.
I have no doubt she has the ability to compete at a much higher level as she has done a few intermed runs, but competing isnt her buzz, its producing.

 

[1Lucie]

I would class myself as novice. But when i had riding lessons at a school, between my loan horse seelling and buying my boy, i phoned and told them i was novice and when i had my assessment the instructor disagreed with me! However, most of their pupils were kids and were learning to trot!!!!

Difficult to quantify really!

 

[woodlandswow]

This gets even more confusing when you look at riding schools. They tend to group pupils as novice intermediate and advanced yet the most advanced group would probably only just be novice when compared to say the average BS rider.

So its all about where you set the base line or bar. Without that the terms are pretty useless.

this!! it was quite awkward recently my cousin who loves horses but cant have one came to stay recently and as a treat my mum organised for her to go on a hack from our local competition yard where my pony was at the time.
she got there and the yard manager said "so what level are you at?"
cousin "well i am classed as advanced at my yard"
me "rigghhhttt..." as much wink wink nudge nudge was going on to YM as possible!!
she got on the pony that we used for lessons and she couldnt even stop the thing!!

As above i think it depends on if you are saying competing wise, experience wise or literally level wise.. its very hard to judge!

 

[tazzle]

I think you might have a good point there. People who have ridden only riding school horses do not always understand that a non-riding school horse, ridden on a non-riding school situation is something altogether different from what thay have experienced

most definately this when it comes to trying to assess how to assess a persons abilities / standard.

Potential loanee for my daughters horse ( she grew up and moved away) told me she had been at level of galloping / jumping and had been having lessons for 2 years. However when she got on it was clear she had no balance, no knowledge of any aids apart from kick, pull and tug a rein to turn. She was (on her own admission) cr****** herself when we went out on a hack and went up and down a hill ...... she had only ridden on the flat. I also found out she could NOT rise to the trot at all and just bounced along

The really worrying thing ws the she did not consider herself to still be a novice and was hoping to get a horse of her own. .....she knew almost nothing about horse care / management either.

OK yes we all need to start somewhere and so she could learn more she did have B on loan on site so I could mentor her ...

....but the thing it that many RS often give some people an impression they can do more than they actually can.


I agree totally that the terms novice and experienced require defining according to the range of level / riding / discipline.


Like others I would evaluate the situation and relevance to the skills required if I was required to give someone an idea of what I consider myself.




and does it just relate to riding or to "horsemanship"..... which is not the same thing