Yet Another Height-Related Proposal

[Miniv]

Is this Height related or ACTION related? And I am assuming this is AMHR?

Back in the "olden days" of AHMA people had a similar complaint....(if I'm gauging this correctly. If not, I'm sure I will be told!)

There were some wonderful high stepping miniatures in the AMHA shows who were being entered in BOTH Country Pleasure AND Open Pleasure Driving Classes. (Park Driving was rarely ever offered.) And there were some outstanding FORWARD MOVING miniatures --- all competing in the same classes.

Technically a horse was either one or the other.....(including park driving - which is extreme high kneed action), but the judges were not educated with the difference. I noted that few of them had bothered to read the rule book and few of them knew about performance classes.

Eventually the rules were changed. No horse who showed in COUNTRY PLEASURE could be cross entered into an OPEN PLEASURE driving class -- "in the same show"..... of course, that was a loop hole, but at least it was something.

It was a start.... I am no longer showing, so don't know what's going on at the moment. I hope AMHR will at least do something similar to distinguish the different style of action with our small equine.

Good luck.

 

[Yaddax3]

Here is what concerns me:

Minis that dominated and won in Pleasure Driving just a few years ago will have a tough time competing against the high-stepping, level-breaking ponies now showing as Miniatures. And I fear that many of those one-time terrific Pleasure Driving horses now will slide in Country Pleasure to become dominant once again ... and then all those wonderful Country Pleasure horses that have been successful will have no class that suits them.

I go back to something I wrote earlier: If ASPC can have a Classic Shetland division for ponies that don't have quite as much action as Moderns, why can't AMHR at least look into creating another division? Western Country Pleasure found a place. Maybe it's time for some sort of extreme Pleasure Driving class.

Then again, maybe not.

It's not up to me and I'm just repeating what I heard: That there is a proposal to address the more extreme minis.

 

[disneyhorse]

Here is what concerns me:

Minis that dominated and won in Pleasure Driving just a few years ago will have a tough time competing against the high-stepping, level-breaking ponies now showing as Miniatures. And I fear that many of those one-time terrific Pleasure Driving horses now will slide in Country Pleasure to become dominant once again ... and then all those wonderful Country Pleasure horses that have been successful will have no class that suits them.

I go back to something I wrote earlier: If ASPC can have a Classic Shetland division for ponies that don't have quite as much action as Moderns, why can't AMHR at least look into creating another division? Western Country Pleasure found a place. Maybe it's time for some sort of extreme Pleasure Driving class.

Then again, maybe not.

It's not up to me and I'm just repeating what I heard: That there is a proposal to address the more extreme minis.

In the same respect, I don't think the miniatures who were competitive in Pleasure ten years ago could compete against the miniatures today... and twenty years ago THOSE minis couldn't be competitive.

Time marches on, as breeders continue to IMPROVE the breed... breeders should be striving to improve the breed, not make the breed stagnant and try to limit the possibilities.

Andrea

 

[muffntuf]

Andrea,

I kind of see Yaddax3's point - You are right, miniatures of 7-10 years ago cannot compete in the Open Pleasure or Country Pleasure classes today. So they created the Western Country Pleasure, which is hugely popular.

So why not incorporate or change the Park Classes to accomodate? I don't see a huge issue here.

 

[Yaddax3]

In the same respect, I don't think the miniatures who were competitive in Pleasure ten years ago could compete against the miniatures today... and twenty years ago THOSE minis couldn't be competitive.

Time marches on, as breeders continue to IMPROVE the breed... breeders should be striving to improve the breed, not make the breed stagnant and try to limit the possibilities.

Andrea

Actually, I'm all for improving the breed, and adding an extreme pleasure division will help accomplish that.

As stated early on, it appears the proposal to measure at the withers is an attempt to tamp down the influx of high-stepping Modern-types into the mini world.

Measuring at the withers will limit the influx of these extreme driving minis because many have high withers that drop off like a ski slope to the last hair of the mane. And while they measure as a mini at the last hair of the mane, they won't measure at the top of the withers.

 

[JMS Miniatures]

There is a driving class for these extreme moving ponies, thats the park class. The problem is very few go into it and stay in the very popular pleasure class. Very few horses are in the park. What needs to happen is they need to clarify the rules for the pleasure division and say EXTREME MOVEMENT should be penalized. Maybe that way they will go into Park. The driving division with the miniatures is HUGE. They did right when they added the western class. It was a much needed class. Adding another division for extreme moving horses when we already have a class for that I just don't see the need for. Maybe in the future, but not now.

If we were to add a whole new divison it needs to be for the minis that don't have so much of the shetland influence.

 

[Devon]

Andrea,

I kind of see Yaddax3's point - You are right, miniatures of 7-10 years ago cannot compete in the Open Pleasure or Country Pleasure classes today. So they created the Western Country Pleasure, which is hugely popular.

So why not incorporate or change the Park Classes to accomodate? I don't see a huge issue here.

I think I would show more interest in taking my pony in park if firstly I ddint have to have a viceroy and secondly there were more in it

Maybe a class similar to park call it what you want but without the viceroy and to a regular show cart. I have a pony that could probably go park when he's trained but Ill be doing pleasure ot be able to get his HOF and have competition

 

[CLC Stables]

Devon

In the AMHR Park Harness classes you DO NOT have to show to a Viceroy. You can show Park in a two wheeled vehicle with a basket.

 

[midnight star stables]

I think I would show more interest in taking my pony in park if firstly I ddint have to have a viceroy and secondly there were more in it

Maybe a class similar to park call it what you want but without the viceroy and to a regular show cart. I have a pony that could probably go park when he's trained but Ill be doing pleasure ot be able to get his HOF and have competition

Yup, I plan to show in a two wheeled cart at first. That's what I can afford.

Not as fancy, so the horse will have to be. LOL

 

[Crabtree Farm]

In the same respect, I don't think the miniatures who were competitive in Pleasure ten years ago could compete against the miniatures today... and twenty years ago THOSE minis couldn't be competitive.

Time marches on, as breeders continue to IMPROVE the breed... breeders should be striving to improve the breed, not make the breed stagnant and try to limit the possibilities.

Andrea

I agree with you Andrea. Also if people breed with the knowledge of form to function, of course they will produce higher stepping horses with those with high withers. So are they striving to produce that "mutton" withered horse with less action.

Can you imagine how far the height registry has improved? How far will it improve in another 5-10 years. I remember taking my first mini, a tall B to his first show in 2001. One person told me to take him home since he looked like a shetland. So there was prejudice that he looked like a shetland. I do often joke and call him my grade shetland. Hmmm funny, he does look like one and many people assume that he is. But would you condemn him because of his withers?

And by the way he does a beautiful country pleasure trot.

 

[stormy]

I guess part of the question is, is the extreme action of the modern and improvement on the long stride, break level movement of the pleasure horse. To me (my opinion) it is not an improvement or advancement, it is a differant type of movement all together and should be judged in a differant division with horses that move in a similar way.

The open pleasure horse is my dream horse. The more modern movement, though I love to watch it, is not what I prefer to drive. If we continue to promote the more extreme action in Pleasure were do all those beautiful long and round movers go? Country? Not hardly.

Again, from my experiance, Pleasure, Park and Formal driving might fit the type movers we have with formal being very extreme hackney type movement, Park being more like modern pleasure? and keep the Pleasure division for those ground covering minis that are breaking level. In the next 5 to 10 years I am sure the Park division would see a greater number of horses competing...and as I said before this gives the registry an opportunity to grow the performance division.

 

[~Lisa~]

Bob and Stormy I agree with you 100 percent.There is more to improvement then simply adding ASPC not everyone wants a Modern... we as a breed are shooting ourselves in the foot. I will once again get flamed and told Iam sure that what I post has nothing to do with anything LOL those good ol love and light moments LOL

Those who show are a small percentage of this registry...those others the large majority are the bread and butter and provide the funds for both Mini Nationals and ASPC congress as well as many other things this registry does.

You will never change minds for some they simply do not like the movement of a Modern (which for the record someone posted on one these threads ASPC was the most purebred breed - well ya if you consider Hackneys and Shetlands together somehow purebred) but that aside.... while beautiful and exciting to watch they are not everyones cup of tea.

Before anyone gets their panties in a twist I own ASPC ponies- Mod Pleasure and Classic ponies I love them however they are not what I personally look for in my minis..

I think we personally are going to drive many out of this registry with the belief you must have ASPC to improve or breed nice horses it is not true if it was guess what every ASPC farm would be breeding beautiful animals.. that is clearly not the case.

I think in the long run.. we will be hurting ourselves we are not ASPC we are AMHR many choose to be in both - many will not yet we are not giving those that do not anywhere to go short of back to AMHA. It does not mean if they dont choose to breed ASPC they have crap horses- are poor sports- are barn blind it simply means they choose not to be pony breeders for whatever reason. That is not respected instead they are assumed to be backyard breeders breeding poor animals. OR those who have talentless animals but what Bob and Stormy are saying is 100 percent accurate... IMO that will be more damaging to our miniature breed then anything else being discussed on this fourm now

On the plus side.. we as AMHR keep this going and there will be no need to argue about where Congress will be.. we can have one big long National show...

 

[Mominis]

A park horse is not just a horse with extreme movement. A park horse's major characteristic is brilliance. You can't just use a park class as a dumping ground for a bigger stepper than others in the pleasure division and maintain the integrity of the class. A formal class or a fine harness class may be a better place for an elegant moving, high stepping hrose who doesn't have "brilliance." However, if in AMHR shows, people are not using the park division, why would formal or fine harness would be any more successful?

 

[Crabtree Farm]

A park horse is not just a horse with extreme movement. A park horse's major characteristic is brilliance. You can't just use a park class as a dumping ground for a bigger stepper than others in the pleasure division and maintain the integrity of the class. A formal class or a fine harness class may be a better place for an elegant moving, high stepping hrose who doesn't have "brilliance." However, if in AMHR shows, people are not using the park division, why would formal or fine harness would be any more successful?

You hit the nail right on the head. A fine harness class. Because some people don't understand what park is all about. And to make it less than what it should be is a joke.

 

[stormy]

Again Park is relative to a persons individual experiance. This is AMHR, not ASPC. Park does not have to be the same as ASPC Park. We as a registry (AMHR)can decide what should be represented in a Park class.

(I am not sure how you define brilliance, I have seen brilliant performers in each and every division.

)

 

[Mominis]

On page 265 of the rulebook, AMHR has already done that, Stormy. In fact they have defined both Park Harness and Fine Harness.

Park Harness is Part 19 and the general description is:

The horse is to give a brilliant performance with style, presence, finish, balance, and cadence. Park horse to be neatly trimmed, well groomed, braided with one braid in the foretop and one immediately back of the bridle path. Tail braces and false tails are optional. To be judged on brilliant performance, presence, quality, manners, and conformtaion. Cross entries with the same horse are prohibited between the Park Harness, Pleasure, and Country Pleasure Divisions at the same show.

The term brillance does not appear in the description of Fine Harness as listed in the rulebook.

 

[Lewella]

Again Park is relative to a persons individual experiance. This is AMHR, not ASPC. Park does not have to be the same as ASPC Park. We as a registry (AMHR)can decide what should be represented in a Park class.

(I am not sure how you define brilliance, I have seen brilliant performers in each and every division.

)

ASPC does not have a Park class.

ASPC has Roadster & Harness for Modern ponies; Formal Pleasure & Country Pleasure for Modern Pleasure ponies; Roadster, Pleasure, & Country Pleasure for Classic ponies; and Roadster & Country Pleasure for Foundation ponies.

 

[muffntuf]

I think they are just referring to Harness in the Moderns compared to Park Harness for AMHR. Harness is not a usual term in AMHR.

 

[maranatha minis]

I think we need more visual examples of these different styles of driving. To me it is hard to understand the deffinitons in the rule book. I know if I had a video (for example) of the driving styles it would be easier to decide where my horses would need to be shown. also there is more to be judged on the horse than just movement. manners, grooming overall appearence, ect.

 

[Minimor]

Those who show are a small percentage of this registry...those others the large majority are the bread and butter and provide the funds for both Mini Nationals and ASPC congress as well as many other things this registry does.

True enough, but it’s entirely possible that some who do not show but like to drive may still like to have bigger moving horses, and so may like to have the dreaded Shetland type in their minis. My minis have always been more for fun/pets/around home driving than they have been for showing, yet I still like them to have the better movement and more style. I don't have any Modern shetland in my Minis, but I wouldn't mind if I did. I saw photos of one recently, and I sure wouldn't mind having one that looked like him!

quote] .There is more to improvement then simply adding ASPC not everyone wants a Modern...

also true. There are some poor quality shetlands out there so it’s foolish to take just any small sized Shetland & think it can be used to improve the AMHR horses. However, it is equally foolish to turn away Shetlands completely for the reason “they are too good moving and it’s not fair to the non-Shetlands to have to compete with them”.
Stormy—you cannot make the Park division into a place that is just for horses that you don’t want in the Pleasure Driving division! Yes, this is AMHR, but that doesn’t mean that the AMHR Park division should be a joke compared to other breeds. IMO Park should be Park, regardless if it’s AMHR, Arabian, Morgan or ASPC. Obviously the AMHR Park horses aren’t going to look quite like a Morgan park horse, but IMO the AMHR park horse should still have the brilliance, animation and action that sets Park apart from Pleasure. Thing is, if you (these are general yous, not you specifically!) have some AMHR park horses that have higher action but nothing else and that’s what you think the division is…what happens when someone comes along with a truly brilliant park horse. That horse is going to win, or should win, because THAT is what a park horse is all about. Then those with the lesser horses—the horses that have the higher-than-pleasure action but not the brilliance and animation a park horse should have—are going to squawk that it’s not fair that they have to compete against this truly brilliant animal that is every inch what some of us believe a park horse should be. Then what will be the method used to get rid of this unfair competition?? What division will you try to force that horse into next, to get him out of Park???

Based on what I’ve seen in other breeds (big horses) I think it’s inevitable that as people breed for better and better show horses we will see the Minis become better moving….better as in longer strided/more elevation/more knee and hock flexion…does that mean that some others get left behind? Yes, for sure. Is it entirely fair that such is the case? Perhaps not really. It would become even more unfair if the rules were changed to allow shoes, and pads, and weights—and that is one positive thing about AMHR. In the big horse breeds, these things are allowed. In Morgans, for instance, it long ago became the norm for hunter pleasure horses to wear weighted shoes…not as heavy as the shoes the park horses are allowed, but still some weight. Once you allow shoes & pads and weights the playing field really becomes uneven. You can have a horse with awesome natural movement, and in most cases he’s going to get passed over in favor of horses that may be lesser naturally, but that move higher when shod up. If you want to show your horse barefoot, you are at a big disadvantage & your horse is likely to be non-competitive at the breed shows. I don’t object to horses that are good moving naturally, but I have to wonder how long it will be before some start wanting to have rules changed so that they can shoe the Minis?