SHB(GB)- Barefoot haters?!

[Exploding Chestnuts]

I can't let this comment go. Quite an insult to judges, most of whom gave up our time for nothing much more than a bottle of wine and a lunch.

As a competitor it is your responsibility to produce a horse that is safe, schooled and mannerly to both the ride and the conformation judge. Under no circumstances is the judge there to school your horse or be expected to deal with any bad manners, high spirits or plain ignorance.

The judge is entitled to send your horse out long before it has dumped him. As a competitor you are entitled to expect the ride judge to ride your horse correctly and fairly. Your horse should be presented in a safe state in terms of tack and way of going.

John Chugg's fall changed his and his family's life forever.

On the point of shoes I can see both points of view. We should be striving to breed and produce hunters with top quality feet to ensure soundness and longevity, but equally we have a duty of care to ride judges and other competitors in the ring. The season closes tomorrow at Moreton in the Marsh and there will be a few unbalanced horses skidding their way round the rings. Both shod and unshod horses will skid around but properly schooled horses will go a lot better than the unschooled.

Obviously I am fully sympathetic with any life changing event, I was not being in the least unsympathetic, I am just pointing out the realities of life today, I don't pretend to know anything about the particular case.

All I said was that it seems like commonsense to be insured, better than having to sue with costs and risks involved there.
I would not get on any horse I did not know if it had already put me off once for no reason, no matter that the producer is supposed to have schooled it.

I did not at any time suggest the judge is there to school a horse, just the opposite, if the horse is not schooled properly and is misbehaving then he should probably not ride it never mind school it.

As to expenses, well it is a hobby, if I go ski-ing for example, I would consider insurance is part of my holiday costs, the risks are much higher than if I stayed at home. Insurance is expensive, but one could be knocked down by a bus, and this would also be covered by personal insurance.

 

[AdorableAlice]

Obviously I am fully sympathetic with any life changing event, I was not being in the least unsympathetic, I am just pointing out the realities of life today, I don't pretend to know anything about the particular case.

All I said was that it seems like commonsense to be insured, better than having to sue with costs and risks involved there.
I would not get on any horse I did not know if it had already put me off once for no reason, no matter that the producer is supposed to have schooled it.

I did not at any time suggest the judge is there to school a horse, just the opposite, if the horse is not schooled properly and is misbehaving then he should probably not ride it never mind school it.

As to expenses, well it is a hobby, if I go ski-ing for example, I would consider insurance is part of my holiday costs, the risks are much higher than if I stayed at home. Insurance is expensive, but one could be knocked down by a bus, and this would also be covered by personal insurance.

I am not entirely sure you understand the production or ethics of showing horses at any level let alone affiliated competition, and I am totally sure you do not have any concept of judging such horses You will find judges are highly respected horsemen, not hobby riders.

 

[Exploding Chestnuts]

I am not entirely sure you understand the production or ethics of showing horses at any level let alone affiliated competition, and I am totally sure you do not have any concept of judging such horses You will find judges are highly respected horsemen, not hobby riders.

I am sorry, it does not matter whether they are professional or amateur horsemen, respected international judges or a local person, common sense dictates a precautionary approach to riding any horse which has put one off for no apparent reason regardless of the fact it is in a showing class and the person is there to judge it according to certain protocols. I would assume any horse which throws people off is not gong to be considered a suitable mount in a class for ridden hunters... it makes no sense otherwise.
Anyone who rides unknown horses regularly would be wise to have appropriate personal accident insurance.
In any insurance judgement there will always be consideration of partial responsibility by the injured party, it is a basic tenet of H&S and the law of the UK.

 

[joycec]

I am not entirely sure you understand the production or ethics of showing horses at any level let alone affiliated competition, and I am totally sure you do not have any concept of judging such horses You will find judges are highly respected horsemen, not hobby riders.

If you aren't paid, then it's a hobby. Plenty of highly respected riders are hobby riders. People do GP dressage, **** event and Master hunts as a hobby.

 

[khalswitz]

If you aren't paid, then it's a hobby. Plenty of highly respected riders are hobby riders. People do GP dressage, **** event and Master hunts as a hobby.

I don't think 'hobby' is the right term. Amateur, yes, but not hobby. I think calling it a hobby when you have reached those levels is a little patronising. Not professional, as obviously they don't make money from it, but I'd say amateur rather than hobby!!!

 

[criso]

but my friend's horse is unshod behind and following him out hacking on grass , you couldn't pay me enough to ride that horse without shoes as he slides all over the place when my fully shod horse does not have a problem with the ground at all
the unshod horse may have a better grip on the road surface, but not in my opinion on grass

I will challenge this to say it probably varies from horse to horse. My horse when shod used to be terrifying on grass, it was like riding Bambi on ice; when his shoes came off (for various reasons) he had much more grip.

Riding with a friend also barefoot, mine coped better with deep muddy conditions so I put that down to different horses not to do with their foot arrangements.

Though as a owner it is your responsibility to ensure your horse is schooled and balanced and he will then be safer round corners full stop.

I seem to remember a while back before this ruling came in there was a prominent person on two in the showing world who was writing very anti barefoot articles or complaint letters in H & H and that could have had an effect.

 

[Exploding Chestnuts]

deleted

 

[Exploding Chestnuts]

I don't think 'hobby' is the right term. Amateur, yes, but not hobby. I think calling it a hobby when you have reached those levels is a little patronising. Not professional, as obviously they don't make money from it, but I'd say amateur rather than hobby!!!

Gosh this is totally pedantic, I am not discussing any particular classification of showing hunters. I really don't care who does what.
Alice brought up the issue of costs not me, if someone does something for whatever reason and at whatever level, they are either a paid professional or they are not.
If a kid gets injured at a riding school after falling off a known unruly pony this will be viewed in a different light to an experienced person who knowingly gets back on to a horse which has thrown him/her.
Any sensible adult partaking in any activity should be aware of his/her responsibilities and this is related to their experience level because this will be taken in to consideration regarding insurance or any other payout. That is all I have to say.

 

[RachelFerd]

More reasons never ever to bother with showing!!!!

 

[khalswitz]

Gosh this is totally pedantic, I am not discussing any particular classification of showing hunters. I really don't care who does what.
Alice brought up the issue of costs not me, if someone does something for whatever reason and at whatever level, they are either a paid professional or they are not.
If a kid gets injured at a riding school after falling off a known unruly pony this will be viewed in a different light to an experienced person who knowingly gets back on to a horse which has thrown him/her.
Any sensible adult partaking in any activity should be aware of his/her responsibilities and this is related to their experience level because this will be taken in to consideration regarding insurance or any other payout. That is all I have to say.

Wow, steady on. I was agreeing with you that a judge is not the same as a standard hobby rider!!

I think the difference in experience is an important classification to make. If you disagree, fine - I don't think it is pedantic, I think it is important.

 

[Tnavas]

I can see the reasoning behind the rule, they have to look after the judges safety.

Do what I did with my Clydesdale before HOY, I got her shod, she wore shoes for the week we were at HOY and then they came off. The shoes are still sitting in the cupboard for the next time.

 

[MagicMelon]

I can see the reasoning behind the rule, they have to look after the judges safety.

Do what I did with my Clydesdale before HOY, I got her shod, she wore shoes for the week we were at HOY and then they came off. The shoes are still sitting in the cupboard for the next time.

Do all horses have to be shod for HOYS? Why on earth should it matter for there, its all held on a surface?! I dont agree its anything to do with their judges safety, after all just because a horse has shoes on, doesn't mean the rider has put studs in for example in which case often a shod horse can be just as slippy (if not more...) than an unshod one.

 

[Exploding Chestnuts]

Wow, steady on. I was agreeing with you that a judge is not the same as a standard hobby rider!!

I think the difference in experience is an important classification to make. If you disagree, fine - I don't think it is pedantic, I think it is important.

No i was not getting at you ... I just took the quote to link it to my previous and current post
I define hobby as something of interest which is undertaken without payment, it usually incurs both cost and time.
A judge may or may not be a paid professional in the same field, but may volunteer their services and in the case of horse judges, it will require a level of expertise appropriate to the level of competition. Basically they volunteer because they want to do it.
I never at any time compared judges with hobby riders, or anybody else. I did not use that expression. Most riders are pretty average, but there are plenty who are talented, if they don't want to / are not capable of judging it does not affect their riding ability.