News: Articles:

An Amateur Point of View

The View from the Rail
Taking a look at the ’05 U.S. Nationals
by Russ Vento

In 2005, for the first time in 17 years, I didn’t compete at the U.S. Nationals. Having injured my back, I’m officially out of the saddle for another year, which from my point of view is not a very happy situation but I’m trying to make the best of it. So this year, I went to our industry’s biggest show and made it my job to listen and to watch. Here are my impressions of Albuquerque, October 20-29—my own thoughts and what I heard from others.

The horses

I thought the young horses were off the charts. The quality of purebred and Half-Arabians that we’re breeding is athletic and beautiful. Like any other breed, we have our faults, but the young horses—the futurity and the junior horses that are coming up—are incredible in every division, across the board.

  Having said that, let me add that I would like to see some of the training toned down a little bit, so the horses can be a little bit more natural for their age. By ‘toned down,’ I mean not pushed so hard. Let them make mistakes, let them have fun. So they jump a little, they play a little—I think that’s fine. I know it’s a competition and it is performance, but the rule for the junior horses is quality first, manners last. So let them be fresh; let them be exciting. In other words, judge by the specifications of the class. It all goes back to what the judges want and reward.

The judging

Everybody complains about the judging; I don’t care what horse show it is, what breed it is, what class it is. You can’t make everybody happy all the time. But there are a lot of people complaining about a judging system where two judges can have a horse first and one can have it tenth, or two have it in the top four placings and one has it tenth – or not on the card at all. There is something wrong with a system that can be swayed that way. Or when a horse is unanimous in another section, and with a comparable performance, is second-third-nothing or first-second-nothing. (Note that I’m saying ‘a comparable performance’; I’m not talking about where a horse makes a big mistake in front of one judge that the other two do not see.)

  Let me also say that I’m not talking about winners here. This is not sour grapes. By the time you get to that level, every horse is a great horse. I don’t think that what people are complaining about is that their horse did not win championship or reserve. The complaint is ‘how can they be champion or reserve on one card and tenth on another?’ We’re talking about a consistency of standards here; even allowing for judges’ personal preferences, there should not be such a discrepancy.

  According to our rule book, judging is on a specific standard or type. One judge may like a specific style of horse and one may like another; that’s great. But I can’t imagine that when they are looking at 16 of the best horses in the country, there is so much difference between the top two that one judge is 10 places off. Again, this problem would not exist to this extent if a judge judged to the class specifications, rather than to his or her own preferences.

    The bottom line is that we need to come up with a system that works. If that means assigned penalties for the specific faults, so be it. Or perhaps, on a random basis, judges might be asked to explain certain placings. At the seminars where we learn to be judges, we have what is called a ‘reasons class,’ where we have to tell why we placed horses as we did. Certainly at the Nationals we don’t have time for that, but on a limited basis, something of that sort might be feasible. Officials might not be able to sit down and write out their opinions in center ring, but, for example, a stenographer with a tape recorder might chat with them between classes and post their thoughts as the show progresses. 

  Those are only a couple of suggestions. I don’t want to complain without offering some solution, and I hope others will as well. Whatever we do, we need accountability from our judges in both the halter and performance arena This year, it looked as if they were passing the awards around. I realize that this is an inflammatory statement; I probably should buy myself a bullet-proof vest. But I was hearing it from many, many people, and if we’re talking about it in private, it’s about time we faced it in public. I’m also aware that when many different horses win the awards, many more owners are happy, but the Nationals, where the top honors in the Arabian breed are won, should be sacrosanct.

  This is an addressable issue. The more clear and consistent our judging is, the better for everyone. Looking on the bright side, a new, workable system would call positive attention to the officials whose judging reflects real adherence to the specifications of each class.

Amateurs

Wow, were amateurs on the mark this year! I watched them working and listening and videotaping and asking questions and going in there and showing their hearts out, and in my opinion, the level of amateur showmanship in all the divisions was better than in years past. They knew their jobs, they’d done their homework, they got in there and went for it.

  I also think the new 55 and older classes blew people away. By allowing those riders to compete against people in their own age group, it appeared to level the playing field, and their confidence went through the roof. Certainly some of the ones who won at 40 and over are still winning at 55 and over, but that top ten was confident, strong, and believed that they had a chance to be the best they could be on that day.

The line-up: should we allow a work-off?

At the U.S. Nationals, work-offs are not allowed. For those not familiar with work-offs, they occur in performance classes when the judges have narrowed their top horses to just a few, but need a little more observation to confirm their thoughts. In this case, the class is called to the line-up, and those top horses are put back on the rail to work one more time. As far as I know, work-offs are not allowed at the Nationals because time is in short supply. This is understandable, but from what I saw, unofficial works have somehow slipped onto the scene anyhow, so no time is really being saved.

  These days, when the judges call for the line-up, several horses either keep on making passes or come in and then jump back out to go up and down again. Even riders who disagree with it in theory feel compelled to join in because they want to remain in front of the judges. Or—another scenario—the judges keep everyone on the rail forever, in reality studying only those few horses who will be at the top of their cards It is another way to have a work-off without calling it that.

  Why not just allow work-offs? Let the judges call the class, have everyone make a pass or two and then come in, and then, if necessary, call the top contenders back to rail? It won’t be any more time-consuming than what is going on now. And as a final argument, just think of how exciting it would be for the crowd. You cheer your favorite through the class, hold your breath until the judges make their choices, and then scream your lungs out one more time when you know that a win is only a few seconds away. Talk about getting the audience involved!

The second biggest activity at Nationals: sales

The Nationals is second only to Scottsdale for buying and selling horses. Everybody wanted to buy and it was like there weren’t enough horses. As you can probably figure out, I was one of those looking to buy, and I found it a tough road. Some of that is just that trainers often don’t want to sell their best horses, and that’s fine. I understand that. But I ran into a couple of situations this year that I hope are not typical—and if they are becoming typical, then we need to call a halt as a breed or we have got trouble.

  I found it a little offensive that when asking a trainer for a price, the response was ‘what’s it worth?’ (This could be translated to mean ‘how much will you pay, whether it’s worth it or not.’) I’m not an appraiser. I have money to trade for a horse; the trainer knows the value of the horse. He or she should tell me what it is worth and I’ll be a gentleman and say I’m in or out.

  Another practice that needs to disappear is changing a price after it has been quoted. For a trainer, if this means talking to the owner before stating a price—fine. Do it. Then stick to it. The idea of quoting a price, finding out who the buyer is and then raising the price is not exactly the way to inspire confidence in prospective buyers. It is getting to where when you get a price, you have to put in a down payment right there because you are afraid they will change their mind.

I guess what I am saying is that procedures and terms of a sale should be agreed to at the start, and then all parties should adhere to the program. The more accepted and reliable our standard practices are, the more our owners—and that includes me; I’m an owner—feel confident in this industry. 

Summing up

Overall, this year’s Nationals was one of the most positive I can remember. Yes, there was negativity, but from a showmanship standpoint, it was great. Everyone was on the mark; the horses were good, the trainers were good, the amateurs were good. People weren’t freaking out under pressure. I think we all were ready this year.

  It was a pleasant Nationals on other fronts, too. The weather was good, and there was time to work and to sleep. Say what you want to say about Albuquerque, the multiple work areas make it fairly easy to schedule work without resorting the middle of the night.

  A special treat was that we saw a lot of old champions return and be rewarded, while there was also the excitement of watching people win their first national top ten. I recall one lady in particular. It was her first top ten ever; she went top ten on her amateur horse and her trainer rode it to a top ten as well. She was so excited and so thrilled that I was excited for her. It made me remember my first top ten, and all the hard work that went into it That trophy to this day is a favorite—that first reward for your efforts is so special that it has a meaning all its own.

  I was so touched, thinking about all those who took home top tens this year. A championship is one thing, and sometimes I think we all get too focused on that. Stop and think about what a top ten means. It means you’re showing one of the top ten best horses in the country. That’s pretty darn special; when you’re talking 30 to 80 horses in a class division, it’s immeasurably special. It is just plain big, no matter how you look at it.

  In closing, having expressed here both the positive and the negative, let me clarify that when I say negative, I really see opportunities to improve our industry. I firmly believe that it is time for us to unite, and I think that is beginning—the halter and performance people should unite, the purebred and Half-Arabian enthusiasts should unite … all of us together. It is not a time for separation. The Half-Arabian complements the purebred, the halter and performance horses complement each other. A good horse is good horse. A showy horse is a showy horse.

  As the old Beatles song says, “Let’s come together right now.”

For anyone who would like to email questions, topics, or comments, I can be reached at info@battagliafarms.com. I’d love to hear from you.

Russell Vento Jr. has been involved in the Arabian industry for 25 years, and since 1989 has been a partner in Battaglia Farms. He was honored twice with APAHA Amateur Horseman Awards. To date, he has owned or shown 30 U.S., Canadian and National Show Horse national champions, and he now enjoys watching his daughter Skyler win on many of the horses with whom he was successful. He has been a Large R USAE/AHA judge since 1996.

Related Links:

Show Results
Recent Sales
Articles
Calendar