Thoughts on this please...

[icestationzebra]

Today was a well known local charity unaff dressage competition which is always well supported because the organisers are local and it's for a fab cause. They work hard to promote it and get decent prizes ... One of the novice classes was won by a pro on a 3* horse. There were no restrictions on entry so this person was totally entitled to be there. My question is do you think they should have ridden HC and let a true amateur win?

Just interested in thoughts really as another pro in another class did just this. Oh and just to point out it's not sour grapes as I wasn't riding in that class, said person chose to beat me hands down (along with a couple of others ) in the Elem instead i was genuinely pleased for the organisers that they attracted such a good turnout and hopefully raised a good bit of money.

As I said - just interested in your thoughts and I'm not having a moan!

 

[black_horse]

TBH as it was unaffiliated there is not sportsmanship in them winning is there? I am all for getting horses out to party to gain experience, but unless the horse has had issues lately i.e. coming back from injury or lost their nerve, they should have gone HC.

 

[SpottedCat]

After discovering that the reason a pro on a 4* horse beat me in an unaff prelim was because they'd had a spinal tumour removed, been told they'd never walk again let alone ride and were relearning to balance because if the horse moved unexpectedly they'd fall off, I will never judge anyone again for entering a class that they might appear to be overqualified for on paper (even if there are no restrictions on entry).

I think the number of people who actually pot hunt are far fewer than the number of people others perceive to be pot hunting

 

[Santa_Claus]

depends does said 3* horse normally do a good dressage test? I know of 4* horses I would happily have in the same class as me as they struggle with the dressage. Also a 3/4* horse should also be used to working in a far more advanced frame which would get marked down.

If the rules allow it then so be it. I might be put out if competing if say Ruth Edge turned up on one of hers as well I know she would wipe the floor with me but it would just make me try harder!

 

[kerilli]

depends totally on the circumstances, but if it is a big name on a going-3*-this-season horse (as opposed to a semi-retired one, say) then I think it would be far more sportsmanlike to have gone HC.
after all, to a Pro on a 3* horse a red rosette at unaff is not meaningful, is it? big fish - little pond scenario...

 

[Santa_Claus]

I think it also depends on the competition though as there are some rather important (personally speaking) competitions to some riders. Take the SJ competition that Vere Phillips started in memorial of his wife Polly, that is always a very strong class with mainly affiliated riders including 4* eventers

 

[oldvic]

I don't think a lot of pros would even register that it might be pot hunting. Their thought process is likely to be "It would be good for ****** to go and do a test to get him in an arena, he's eligible for that which means he can do more tests". Many would not think any further than that which may appear selfish but when you are trying to pay bills/keep owners happy, you don't necessarily put others first or do what may seem to others to be fair. That doesn't mean it's right, it's just how it is.

 

[SusieT]

Why should they forfeit a chance at prize money (i.e earning the horses keep)? I assume they didn't win by 20% i.elook stupid. 3* horses dressage is probably not that wonderful in proper dressage classes so its up to the rider personally.

 

[kerilli]

Why should they forfeit a chance at prize money (i.e earning the horses keep)? I assume they didn't win by 20% i.elook stupid. 3* horses dressage is probably not that wonderful in proper dressage classes so its up to the rider personally.

Umm, a 3* horse's dressage should be well up to the standard of local unaffiliated at the lower levels... at 3* you have to do half pass, flying changes, etc etc... and nowadays I doubt you'd get a horse to 3* unless its dressage was, at the very least, reasonably decent!
Surely it's about good sportsmanship?

 

[icestationzebra]

Thanks for your thoughts. This horses dressage is very good historically but understand it's had some time off with injury sustained last season. As I said originally not a moan..

 

[SusieT]

so theres the reason. Simple-had an injury, needs working back into the dressage scene. I've seen plenty of 3* horses whose dressage leaves a lot to be desired...

 

[icestationzebra]

Susie - I never asked whether the horse should have been there or not - more the question as to whether a horse of it's level should have been HC. This isn't a horse with problems with the dressage at all. As Kerilli says 'perhaps it's about sportsmanship?'

 

[TarrSteps]

I would agree, I doubt anyone thought it through. And don't forget that riders have owners who like to see their horses do well. As observed, the horse has had an injury. Perhaps he has traditionally required a great deal of working in, which they can't do at his current rehab level, and the horse surprised them by being good!

I got caught that way once. I took a very sharp horse to her first show, assuming I'd be lucky to make it around the ring, and entered everything she was eligible for so she could get maximum ring time. Instead she was an absolute star and won going away. There was definitely grumbling! I actually talked the owners into withdrawing from the last class - fearing we might get lynched! - but they weren't happy, making the valid point they'd paid their entries, why shouldn't they get the chance to win them back?

Next show, the horse blew up like an atom bomb. Swings and roundabouts.