An AMHA Thought

[Feather]

Another forum had this topic, just passing on an idea to "Think about".

When was the last time you saw an "30 & under class " get a Grand Champion?

With all the measuring ruckus at the World this year; maybe it is time to add

Grand Championship classes in the "30" & Under" groups.

1) If AMHA really is against "Over 34" minis" maybe this could relieve some of

the height pressure @ 34".

2) It could put some emphaises back on the smaller mini breeding

3) WHY? Should you take a class Champion in one of the under 30" classes

into the Grand-Champion class while the odds are greater then 99% against you?

4) Maybe, just maybe we could regain some of the lost members who have quit showing their

under 30" minis

5) Just think of the extra value that could be added to AMHA overall , from adding a couple classes?

ETC, ETC, ETC

 

[nootka]

Just my opinion, but when it comes down to it, all things being equal, the smaller horse should win.

That has not been so. Honestly, I have rarely seen a truly smaller horse (NOT going by what they measured at, what they REALLY are) that was better than its taller counterpart.

There ARE some amazing smaller horses and what sickens me is to see them competing against last year's upper height division champ.

Until we get the measuring thing sorted out better, I don't know what it matters. You will have someone with a 32" horse stuffing it into the 30" and under Champ because they know it would gain them a top honor.

This is just my opinion, though, and we all know we are free to have different opinions.

Another honesty is that I certainly don't own a horse whose proportions I love as much as a full-sized anything, and yet I hope to achieve that someday. If my goal were 30" and under, it would still be the same goal, to have those proportions in that height range. It is nothing against the height range, I just think we're farther off from having the best proportions in that category than we are in the say 30" to 34" or 34" to 38" categories.

Maybe I'm jaded, but I guess it would just be another reason to cheat for the cheaters. If there are horses measuring 36" or so winning the 32" to 34" Championships and 32" horses winning the 30" and under classes already....you can see where it is going.

I think all the thinking's been done, it just remains that we all need to be DOING.

Liz

 

[Becky]

The Oklahoma Miniature Horse Club Inc is looking at the possibility of incorporating a 30" and Under Champion Sr Mare and 30" and Under Champion Sr Stallion class into our AMHA club shows in the future. Details are still being worked out, but I think it is a real possibility to have those classes and promote breeding for the smaller, quality horses.

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

Just playing devils advocate here while I think the idea has some merit I am curious as to what would change when people would then be measuring there 31 in horses to get into the 30 and under classes?

 

[Feather]

Why have only the senior mares?

Why not include all 30" under mare class champions?

The numbers at most shows currently "Under 30" " are usually lower

than "32" to 34" " classes.

The measurement is a separate issue that needs addressed.

Breeding pressures are also reflected in this suggestion.

 

[Neil]

Another forum had this topic, just passing on an idea to "Think about".
When was the last time you saw an "30 & under class " get a Grand Champion?

Maybe I am missing something here (wouldn't be the first time) but didn't the World Supreme Champion this past October in Ft Worth come from the 26" & Under class. Granted, she did come from a Weanling Mare class but the judges selected a 26" & Under horse for the best of about 1000 entries.

Oh, I'm sorry, you said 30 & under class. Maybe 26" & Under doesn't count.

 

[andi]

I agree that the measuring issue is completely separate.

We have bred and shown many under 30" horses but have not seen very many that deserved to win National Grand in the open halter classes. I have seen quite few that are really close, and when they are I think they usually get the Reserve they deserve.

I am sure there is probably a much longer more impressive list that could be made if researched, but off the top of my head, just this year ...

Two weanlings won Grand this year at 26", one winning Champion of Champions.

Reserve Grand Champion Senior Stallion and Gelding where both under 30" this year, behind incredible horses.

The Reserve Champion of Champions futurity horse was 27" and either tied or was 1 point behind the Champion.

Another thing to think of is what it would do to these titles if we separated them. Obviously the 30" and unders would not be able to compete in both championships. A win in the smaller championship would most likely not be as "respected" as a win in the taller one. The truly exceptional smaller ones would never have the opportunity to show what they can do, and have done consistently, against the rest of the competition.

 

[Charlotte]

andi, this plan is being thought out for local shows here in Oklahoma. Let's see how it goes here in OK before we begin to worry about taking it farther.

We have a lot of breeders in this area who lament what has happened to our judging (taller is better) and it would certainly benefit our club and the breed/market in this area to further promote the miniature horse in all sizes.

There has also been talk of more push for 30" and under performance classes.

Charlotte

 

[nootka]

What is bothersome about the cheating, though, is that when the measuring is not "fixed" or repaired before this were to become an option or possibility, I see it as another chance for people to cheat and push honest exhibitors out of awards and points by using taller horses in the smaller classes.

A simple fact of human nature: Larger things catch the eye. That one fact makes it harder to compete against a horse that is honestly not under 30" is that the judge will naturally see that horse more readily than the smaller, equal horse.

The other side of the coin is that it's not about size, it's about better proportions. MOST times, a smaller horse just doesn't have the proportions that a horse who is taller does, whether it be an inch taller or a foot taller.

Anyway, I don't think measuring IS a separate issue, it affects everything about the height divisions. Still, I am all for everyone finding a place they can fit in if they don't feel they can compete fairly for whatever reason. It's only right that everyone has a chance at the highest honors, so I don't think it would be good that the 30" and under was it. If they were that good, they should have every right to go against the 30" to 34" champs.

Liz M.

 

[joylee123]

[SIZE=12pt]I'd love to see 30 and under performance classes!![/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Joy[/SIZE]

 

[nootka]

I do think there is a genuine need for the 30" and under performance classes. I know many that can easily keep up with the big horses, but it would be nice to level the playing field for them in that respect.

Halter, not so much.

At least not the way things stand.

Liz