It's going to be one of those days where I post a million different things.
Is it my fault that my fellow bloggers are putting together WONDERFUL posts today?????
Here's one by "Now THAT'S a TROT" that made me feel so good to read this morning.
It obviously wasn't a "good/wonderful" day for her, but it's a great post because it reminds me that:
- Other riders struggle with the SAME issues I do. I'm not the only person that's having trouble with the canter at training level. It's OK to make mistakes and learn from them, you aren't going to look perfect in the ring every time. It's not the end of the world to have a bad day in the ring! It happens! Accept generous compliments, practice humility and humbleness, and let the horse keep its dignity. I love how she strikes a balance between accepting what happened and although she's disappointed, she's not placing too much of the blame on herself OR the horse, just reasonably discussing what happened and even though it's not a "funny" post, I fancy I can sense a bit of humor coming through. (BTW - I can't comment on her blog because I'm at work, so some of you should go over there on my behalf and tell her what a great post she wrote! Go! Do it!)
- This was good timing. Yesterday, on the Chronicle of the Horse Forum, one of the threads was discussing how it is *some* people's opinion that intro should not be included in a recognized dressage show since if your canter is not show ready, you are not ready to show dressage. (similar to the same beat-to-death topic of the endurance LD distance in my opinion....but I digress). For some reason the thread really got to me. I think intro is valuable for people like me - cross overs from other disciplines, whose horses aren't the most ideally suited for the dressage sport, but are interested in perhaps going further with it. Who would like to pay a little money for an intro test and get some feedback before paying a lot of money for a training test. Who aren't incapable of cantering in a safe manner at a show, but it's definitely not showable for a myriad of reasons. Just like an endurance LD, I think intro level dressage tests are good "progress checks" to see if you are on the right track in your training. I guess what really got to me what (at least in the thread) it seemed like a majority of people were against the intro tests. It wasn't split 50/50 at ALL. At least in the "are LDs endurance?" discussions there are enough people on each side to make a lively discussion!
Posts
How timely! I have been emailing a show coordinator all day about intro level classes! A local dressage club puts on four, triple rated shows during the summer. And they include intro tests A & B - perfect for the "non-showing endurance rider who wants to give it a try!" I DON'T WANT to TRY training level. I KNOW I am not ready and I don't want to spend a million bucks on clothes and boots. Intro level allows polo shirts and beige breeches - PERFECT!
ReplyDeleteI made the same complaint to someone who does show that I was asking for advice. I told her that "fun rides" and LD rides can really encourage newbies to try it out. Why wouldn't dressage want new riders?
Aww, thanks for the shout out! I just got done with a backlog of entries stored in my Reader, lol.
ReplyDeleteI think that the entry-level riders always have a place in the sport. Whether or not to offer a place for them at "recognized" competition is up to management -- those shows, at least for dressage and hunter/jumpers, tend to be two or three times as expensive, at minimum, so someone just starting out may not choose to participate. But with the economy treating all businesses poorly, it's not wrong for shows to look for income where they can.
And hey, sometimes it's all about the networking. If the clinic I went to had restricted itself to only the upper level or "real" riders, they would have lost out on business. I went there and was so impressed with the staff and facilities that I sent a friend of mine to check it out -- and now they have a new boarder!