What is the difference!?!

[merlo89]

I have had a very annoying question stuck in my head for a while now, so I was hoping someone could answer it for me.

The question is ... what is the difference between a beginner, novice, intermediate and advanced rider?

I have always classed my self as confident novice but quite frankly I'm not too sure on the difference.

Would be greatly appreciated if you could include examples of what each would do. For example: Canter, trot, jump ( what heights) Just so I can get rid of this frustrating question and actually get on with my life

 

[Dave the dog]

Good question. Seen some very experienced riders that are rubbish at it and some novices that appear to have been born on a horse. I been riding almost every day for a year now, have excellent tuition once a week but still very much a beginner even tho confident when jumping. I was looking at riding holidays and the criteria for intermediate was able to canter and/or ride for 2hrs + over all terrain dependent on the providing stables. So I would suggest that ones ability is more of a state of mind rather than a degree of skill. Some people have suggested that you are not a good rider until you've fallen off 6,7,8,9, times. I've come off once and that's plenty. If you've come off 6,7,8,9 times what the hell are you doing getting on and risking your charmed life not to mention risking the health of your horse. I guess how ever many years my journey lasts I will always be a beginner. Saving up for a week in Tuscany.

 

[Enfys]

How long is a piece of string? Everyone has their own opinions.

Dave Dog said it very well " So I would suggest that ones ability is more of a state of mind rather than a degree of skill."


To me a beginner is someone who is, well beginning. When they can control their mount at w/t/c then they become a novice.

When a Novice can control in all paces and jump and be able to hack out then they rise through the ranks again.

Intermediate - I am not going there - lots of levels

Advanced - ditto But then you get into the realms of advanced rider and advanced trainer and where do the two meld.

I think people are far too modest about their abilities.

It is a British thing. I do it, if someone asks if I have ridden I shrug and say "a bit" which is no answer at all.
Do you know how frustrating that is when you are trying to assess people?! :/ Just say what you are comfortable with.


If I was assessing people to go on a trail ride I want to see them catch, tack up, get on, w/t/c and jump. Their ability to do those would rank them in my eyes, I don't care if they can make a horse skip around in circles or know what a volte is and how to cue for it.

I would call myself advanced if you are talking about the ability to sit on a horse and stay on it, if you are talking about training a horse - I plummet back to novice - which is fine. I have ridden for donkey's years, on all sorts of horses, I had my jockeys ticket, I hunted since I was 10, I've done the SJ and dressagey stuff, but I march to the beat of my own drum. I can (could) ride properly, but I do what feels comfortable and keeps me on the saddle now. English trainers would take my stirrups away and put me back on the lunge line, on the other hand, my trainer now tells me I am doing it right - so horses for courses.

 

[Enfys]

As an addendum, I am also advanced enough to know my limitations. I couldn't ride one side of a Totilas, around Badminton or Hickstead and the likes - therefore on them I would be a novice, but I could, and have, ridden racehorses, flat and NH, I would love to do the Tevis Cup and I ride gaited horses (which look a great deal harder than they actually are) Beginner/Novice/Intermediate/Advanced have many different facets.

I used to know lots of people who keep their horses on full board, have countless expensive lessons and ride a beautiful test, they still can't put tack on though

 

[spacefaer]

I had someone co,e and see a horse I was selling who said he was an "intermediate" rider - bit of a waste of time viewing as I had assumed a level of competence that he didn't possess. He'd had 23 lessons at his riding school who had classed him as "intermediate". I had assumed he would be able to walk, trot and canter in an enclosed space and be able to hack out at walk and trot on a sensible horse.

He fell off trotting round a corner.....

 

[Enfys]

I had someone co,e and see a horse I was selling who said he was an "intermediate" rider - bit of a waste of time viewing as I had assumed a level of competence that he didn't possess. He'd had 23 lessons at his riding school who had classed him as "intermediate". I had assumed he would be able to walk, trot and canter in an enclosed space and be able to hack out at walk and trot on a sensible horse.

He fell off trotting round a corner.....

Exactly. Mind I have fallen off a halt just doing my girth up


So your interpretation he would have been a novice, but to the RS he could have been competent enough to graduate to their scale of intermediate. On a push button school horse.

and then the Novice - Advanced thing applies to Stable Management too.

 

[Barnacle]

Here's the thing I trot out every time someone asks this question: http://www.lrgaf.org/guide/ability.htm With the caveat that you should probably ignore the stuff about having competed since it's silly to assume that choosing not to compete (or not being able to because you don't have the money etc) means you aren't equally capable!

Personally, I class riders as follows:

Novice - can walk, trot, canter and pop a small fence in a school. Can tack up an easy horse. Can hack something fairly bombproof that isn't strong.

Competent - can do all the above and gallop out hacking on a more challenging (read occasionally bucks or might get strong) horse on varied terrain. Won't turn back if something goes wrong and will get back on if they fall off! Can tack up a cheeky pony.

Useful - can do all the above and actually improve the horse's behaviour while they are at it. Are able to do some training if they put their mind to it. Understand groundwork.

Just to be clear so I don't insult anybody... I'm coming at this from the point of view of someone assessing riders for the purpose of riding someone else's horse regularly. I'm really using "useful" in a tongue-in-cheek way to mean an unexpected bonus. In a school context or on holiday, one is no more "useful" than the other I'd add that most people will never progress beyond what I am calling novice here without leaving the riding school environment.

 

[Dave the dog]

The original Question is academic, everyone judges ability by their own criteria I would put understanding ground work within the novice stage of Barnacle's classification, but then what kind of ground work at what level. Perhaps safety should be an overriding (pardon the pun) factor. I agree that competition should be ignored as a value for competence as the perfection of one discipline must erode competence in another. as it is in any walk of life. 'Horses for courses' as Enfys say's. From the four legged perspective, how many horses are ruined by the over exuberance of a perceived competent or advanced rider, the answer is far too many. To be aware of our own limitations (Clint Eastwood) is one thing, To be aware of our mounts limitations, on the day, is something else entirely. Those of us who are lucky enough to ride in a variety of environments should aspire to a level of horseman ship that allows the horse to develop and in turn raise our level of capability. I wouldn't know how to classify that. Yet

 

[Meowy Catkin]

In my mind, you stop being a novice when you can adjust the way you ride to suit the particular mount that you are riding at that time and you can improve the horse.