Ridecamp: Re: [RC] $$MONEY Fer NUTHIN'!$$

Here goes.  I'm about to enter a debate with Mister Karl himself.

And what's interesting is that neither of us does endurance.  Which probably
gives us a unique perspective on all of this.  It also opens us up to being
told to "shut up until you've done it" but I'm hoping other RCers will be
above that (wait, Howard, I'm getting to your post!)

Karl said:

> I'm generally a nice, quiet lurker on here.  Make no waves, stay out of
the messes, and all that.  But...I've just been privately berated for
spewing my view that there really oughta be prize money available for the
Endurance crowd.

Gasp!  I never berate!  Not me, never, never never.

The very thought!

> I'm NOT an Endurace guy.  I don't ride Arabians.  I do cows.  On Quarter
Horses and Paints.  AND...I compete in Pennings, Poles, Barrels, a tad of
Reining, and once in a great while, Reined Cow Horse.

Okay, I don't do endurance either.  And I don't ride Arabs, either.  I ride
English, do a bit of this and a bit of that, ride mostly TBs although I'll
occasionally sit on someone's WB (and then go "why?  Why?" but that's
another topic entirely).

>>I compete for the sport of it, but I really like it when I get to go to
the pay window.

I'm not entirely sure why I compete.  Part of it is for the fun of it, but
on the whole I guess it's because it's another aspect of riding.
Competitive riding *is* different to what you do at home, because the
pressures are different and the goals are different.


Jumping at home is about getting it right.  Doesn't matter whether the fence
is five foot or two foot, it's about approaching it right, hitting it right,
and jumping clean and "correctly".  That sometimes means that, when I'm
jump-schooling, I don't actually "jump" at all, but simply work on rhythm of
approach.  It also means that I'll spend hours schooling over a single
fence, or two fences on a related distance, and not do a course.  It's about
getting it "right".

Same for dressage, really.

When I jump at a show, the primary purpose, at novice level, is to expose
your horse to as much as possible, keep him calm and level-headed, and to
consolidate, in the show, what we've done at home.

That's why, at novice level, if my horse is over-excited and not listening,
I'll risk penalties by circling in front of a fence, and getting him calm,
before jumping.  It's about getting it right, at that level.

Dressage at lower level is approached in the same way.  I won't force my
horse into a head set (as many people do) just so that I don't lose marks
for being "above the bit".  The aim is to get him round the test in a calm,
relaxed, obedient manner.  Aids remain as they are at home.  I refuse to
confuse my horse whilst aiming for ribbons.

Of course, once you've got it right, at novice level, and you're moving up
the grades, the stakes are different.  It's then about winning.  And that's
where you and I agree, Karl.  *If* you're competitive, which I guess I am,
then it's about winning.  Not at all costs (if it were at all cost, I
wouldn't spend the time I do instilling the basics) and not at the expense
of my principles, but yes, I want to win.

Which is why, at higher level, if my approach isn't right, I'll take a
chance and let him jump it, relying on his grounding to get him to "pick up"
and clear it.  I risk a pole, but It's a calculated risk.  It's also why, at
that level, I will go against the clock in the jump-off.  At novice level, I
go for good, solid, double clears, irrespective of jump-off time.  By the
time he's jumping bigger classes, the horse is ready to do the quick turns
and angled jumps required of a good showjumper.

I know you're wondering where I'm going with this.  Bear with me.  It's
coming!


You said:

>>I don't mind an occasional hefty entrance fee when the payback is over
70%.  Shoot...I don't mind a small entrance fee when the payback's over 70%,
either.  Especially when there's a large wad of competitors.  More for me!


Showjumping and dressage don't offer the purses you guys get in Western
disciplines, not unless you're winning Derby, or the National Championships.
Yes, there's prize money, and it'll cover your entries, and your groom's
costs for the day (hey, I ride English, we have grooms.  Leave us alone,
we're happy), and your food, and a celebratory drink for your mates.  It's
not going to buy you much more than that.

The money comes from sponsorships : sponsors want to back winners, not
"also-rans".  It comes from lessons - if you're winning, people want to
learn from you.  And it comes from being asked to ride other's horses, for
a fee.

> Yes, there IS a problem with the "win-at-any-cost" crowd.  No doubt.
Y'know, we have that problem in OUR sports, too, but wiser heads than mine
seem to have arrived at a reasonable solution for that.

> It's called CLASSES.  Divisions of skill-level and expertise.  Ya don't
make the money until ya got the skill.  Neat, huh?  Not counting the
un-sanctioned events (which ARE around, if ya know where to look),  the
Newbies start out in Green Horse, Green Rider; or Green Horse; or Green
Rider.  Green meaning inexperienced--either horse, rider, or both.   There
is NO prize money for those classes.  The participants are learning, and ya
don't get paid for learning.

Ah, but that doesn't, if my reading of what you're saying is correct,
prohibit a Green rider from riding in an advanced class on an advanced
horse, does it?  IOW, does a Green Rider HAVE to start off in the green
classes, even if his horse is advanced?  If not, then you run into your
first problem, and it's one I see a lot in the sports which I do.

By way of example.  There's a horse which is currently jumping C grade out
here.  He's an absolutely incredible little WB, with more natural talent
than I've seen in a horse in a loooong time.  He's born to jump, with
amazing pop, an incredible "eye" for take-off.  He ISN'T an experienced
horse, he's relatively green, but he's one of those rarities : a big-hearted
horse with natural talent.  Despite every effort by his rider, who can't
ride one side of this animal, he has managed to win at novice E level, E
grade level and at D grade level.  But now the wheels are falling off.  The
tracks are bigger, more technical, and the competition is stiffer.  The
horse is starting to buckle under the pressure, and he's become a stopper.

In short, this horse, who could have cleaned up at International A grade
level, has been ruined.  It's not pretty.

Why?  Because the rider was more determined to win at the lower level than
he was to bring his horse on properly.  Because he was winning, he didn't
get the help he should have, thought he was better than he was, and he
didn't improve as a rider.  His horse carried him.

Don't tell me that that doesn't happen in your sport, too?

> BUT...there's an incentive!  Actually, SEVERAL incentives: if you advance
your skills and expertise, you get to advance to a higher level of the
sport, and run with more experienced, but not pro, nor upper-level amateurs.

What if you don't advance your skills or expertise, but simply rely on a
talented, well-trained (by someone else) horse?  Will you also advance?

If so, then herein lies your problem.

>>You can't play in the Open classes, nor the Non-Pro classes.  You get to
play in the Amateur classes, and if you win, you might get your entry fee
back, plus maybe $20/50 bucks, too.  At least it'll pay for yer gas.  As you
advance in skill level, you get to compete against tougher and tougher
competition, and ya get to win more money.  You will NOT find yahoos nor
abusers in the mid to upper levels of our sports.  They are quite serious
Horsemen in every sense of the word.

Okay, now I'm going to tell you something which will probably shock
everybody.  We have a guy out here, jumping International A grade.  His name
is Phillip Tucker - perhaps you've heard of him?  He's a multi-millionaire,
was married to Anneline Kerzner (ex Miss World).  Anyway, Phillip decided to
take up riding, and once he'd taken up riding, he took up showjumping.  Not
happy to jump at lower level, he went straight into A's.  He could afford
the horses, and he had lessons daily (thank goodness for small mercies).

But it still meant that what most of us learn in the novices, he learnt in
the big classes.  And in the big classes, horses, ridden by people with no
clue what they're doing GET HURT!  And he wrote off more horses than I can
count.

He's riding a hellulva lot better now, ten years down the line, but the
point is that, if you have the money, in this sport, you can buy your way
in.  That's the way the game is structured.

Is yours any different?  If so, kudos to you.  But lemme tell you it's the
only equestrian sport of its' kind.  It's one of the reasons why I am so
against the system of grading horses, and am calling for a grading of
riders.  I don't give a rat's ass what the top riders earn when they're
riding at top level, but by God, let them earn it, not buy it!


In short, if there's money to be made in a sport, I'm all for it.  It's an
expensive game, and we deserve to recoup.  BUT what I have a problem with,
with your example, is your "sliding scale" of winnings, because it makes the
incentive to "buy into" the big classes that much greater.  So either you
make it impossible to "buy into" those classes (by grading the rider, as
I've indicated), or you make the prize money equal in the smaller classes to
the bigger classes.  That's the only way you're going to stop the "win at
all costs" folks from exacting great costs from the one thing we have to
protect : the horse.

The problem with grading riders, not horses, though, is that it's going to
have a direct impact on the breeder's pocket, and on the trainer's, who
aren't going to have the market which they seem to rely on :

people who have loads of money, and no talent, but will buy an expensive
horse a year in order to achieve the pot in the big classes.

Tracey








=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
 Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=