|
|
Post by Rider on Nov 21, 2006 7:46:58 GMT
So if this rule comes into place does that mean not only the horse but the rider will also be banned from competing in any more Olympia Classes?
I thought the idea was to encourage entries, not lower them. In HOYs classes once you have qualified you can still compete if you so wish and quite a few do.
Seems weird to me. Think there is now prejudice against producers from NPS. May not affect the big long term producers but will certainly effect the up and coming ones.
WELL DONE NPS - LOOKS LIKE YOU DIDNT DO YOU HOMEWORK PROPERLEY.
I hope they define the word "producer" properly in the new rules, what about people who only take in one horse and do not derive their income solely from producing. What about people who sometimes ride another persons horse on the day for a free drink at the bar?
The NPS are opening a minefield here, hope they will be pleased with their new legacy.
|
|
|
|
Post by shelley on Nov 21, 2006 8:33:44 GMT
Re riders comment about competing in HOYS classes once qualified - typical example is the BSPS summer champs this year, 133 shp. About 8 out of the first 10 had already qualified - the ticket wasn't given out as a result of this. This raises the question of are these ponies re-entered to stop others qualifying? It may be for the prestige of the champs.... however the comments heard in the line up were interesting, and were along the lines of 'oh well it's just a run out for hoys isn't it?' Most of these ponies were 'produced' - I didn't realise people were so blase about hoys..
|
|
|
|
Post by dillis on Nov 21, 2006 8:47:58 GMT
Surely Rider it would mean that both horse and rider would be banned from competeing in any other qualifiers, what if the rider were to qualify two ponies under the new rule they could only take one hence reducing the actual competitors at Olympia
|
|
|
|
Post by Rider on Nov 21, 2006 8:59:16 GMT
Surely Rider it would mean that both horse and rider would be banned from competeing in any other qualifiers, what if the rider were to qualify two ponies under the new rule they could only take one hence reducing the actual competitors at Olympia Sorry Dillis I dont quite understand what you mean sorry. This rule not only effects producers, if you were lucky enough, which I beleive you are, to own two Olympia standard ponies, does it mean you have to decide which one to compete on. If you qualified your first pony early you would then have to leave you other top class horse at home, that to me is not competition. |
|
|
|
Post by Maybe on Nov 21, 2006 9:02:04 GMT
I do have to agree with Dillis . I think that the biggest problem is that the rule appears prejudice to Producers, but what about turning it the other way around. Why as an amateur with one top class pony should i not been given the same chance as a producer? After all i & all of you others like me, are the life blood of the sport. Perhaps the time has come to put Olympias back on an even footing. Perhaps had some judges conducted themselves in a better manner over the last 2/3 years it would not be even necessary to think about a rule change. Ultimately if a producer had 3 Olympia contenders in their yard then they would need 2 other jockeys, which they would need when they got to Olympia anyway. If the ponies are good enough to go then the whole point to what we have been hammering on about is, that if the judging is straight & right they will qualify anyway, regardless of who is sitting on top. Maybe everybody should make their minds up what they want.  Perhaps the rule is workable  |
|
|
|
Post by whats the point on Nov 21, 2006 9:38:40 GMT
Is there anyway we can have a poll done, for thoes in favour and for thoes agaisnt this new rule...........
And could someone please tell me how can limiting the number of ponies and riders stop fixing, bent judging etc etc
It does seem odd to me that this rule has come about, and still allows Comitte members to judge and compete and to carry on doing what they have done in the past, We know comitte members come on here and read what is being said and yet no notice has been taken,
It seems to me that the decison makers here have not asked the members what they want or what would benefit the most elite riding championship..............
This could be the fall of the most elite championship........
|
|
|
|
Post by get withit on Nov 21, 2006 10:15:56 GMT
Producers riding horses to qualify happens in all sections of horses. Jane Webber rode several cobs to qualify hoys for their owners. You can't just say "it's not fair that X has 2 ponies through" if X has the best 2 ponies, they deserve to have them through. And don't start telling producers to "go back to their riding ponies" there have always been producers in natives, so get over it and enjoy being judged by the straight judges    Carol Isacc is one of the top M&M producers in the country and has been doing it for a long as I can remember. She has produced more than one for Olympia on two occasions, I believe and won it. Without people like her the M&M's would of stood still, so dont knock producers. You have plenty of home produced and ameture classes leave the Olympias and professional alone if you dont like the competition stick to your special classes. That is what I was saying, there have been producers in showing for years. If you don't like it, you know what you can do |
|
|
|
Post by MM on Nov 21, 2006 11:06:51 GMT
The more I think about this new rule, the worse it seems to get.
What is the NPS trying to achieve?
Is it due to particular producers having more than one through to the final? Doesnt seem to be valid reason as (from memory) all these ponies have consistantly won before and after the final.
Producers will have more than 1 jockey, therefore it wont really affect them.
The people it will affect are the ones who have their pony produced and want to either ride it at the final or sell it with the ride. What does it really matter if this happens? It sounds more like jealousy that has driven this rule forward!!
Personally I think there are more fundamental issues that need addressing. NPS should look at the judging of the shows in order to encourage people to enter.
I don't think those riding and competing in qualifiers should also judge. I am not saying these particular people are bent, it just gives everyone an opportunity to b*tch when the results are shall we say "different".
As a matter of interest what is the main reason people do not enter the qualifying rounds?
|
|
|
|
Post by Caroline on Nov 21, 2006 11:09:39 GMT
I am not a producer but I do own two top class M&M's. I work full time and do my horses early in the morning.
I have two ponies competing the Olympia classes. The both have a first and I have to elect someone to ride in the championship which happens now. The pony with the other rider qualifies, I have not even discussed with them if they will be available (not thinking I would get two firsts).
I have done all the work, got my ponies in top condition and the other rider will be able to ride my horse at Olympia and I properly wont qualify the other one.
I dont think the NPS have thought this through.
I agree again it is the judges who need sorting not the competition or competitors, it seems if this rule is correct, which I dont think is workable, the NPS have taken the easy way out.
|
|
|
|
Post by anna on Nov 21, 2006 11:23:25 GMT
You have all made some very valid points for and against.
I personally think they should leave well alone.
Is anyone sure this rule is being implimented or was it just discussed at an NPS meeting or just hearsay.
You may all be worrying unnecessarily ;D
If I remember rightly NPS usually give advanced warning of such a major changes. I hope so.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackknight1 on Nov 21, 2006 11:42:13 GMT
I have heard it from 2 very good sources, both of them being on the commitee in one shape or form. I guess we now just have to wait to see what the NPS posts on their website and how its worded....  I believe the rule is once a rider has qualified a pony, he/she cannot compete any other pony in further Olympia qualifiers for the rest of the season. |
|
worried for nothing
Guest
|
Post by worried for nothing on Nov 21, 2006 11:49:30 GMT
How many of us would this rule, as it is written by Black Knight, truly effect? As an amateur that works full time & has a pony qualified for Olympia this year ;D, i know that i couldn't possibly manage to keep more than one pony up & running for the big day. Olympia should be what our dreams are made of & i am proud to have qualified one pony. Actually the thought of two through some how just spoils it for me. |
|
|
|
Post by worried on Nov 21, 2006 12:42:08 GMT
I have heard it from 2 very good sources, both of them being on the commitee in one shape or form. I guess we now just have to wait to see what the NPS posts on their website and how its worded.... I believe the rule is once a rider has qualified a pony, he/she cannot compete any other pony in further Olympia qualifiers for the rest of the season. Are you sure it is definately going to be put in place this year? or was it just disgussed at a Council meeting. I dont think that the NPS would put in such a rule as this without first contact its members. |
|
|
|
Post by intresting on Nov 21, 2006 12:53:38 GMT
Okay worried for nothing, i see your point however like you say you work full time . With this new rule the nps are effecting the businesses of the producers so therefore think about halfing your wages and your workload, After all is anyone really gonna pay for someone to produce their pony all season if they qualify for hoys early and then that producer qualfies another pony for olympia and your ponies season is then over til oct! Not sure i would.
While i think there is room for improvement within the olympia rules, is this relly the way to go ? Olympia has always been about the best of the best and thats what makes it special take this away from it and is anyone without a vested interest really travel all the way to london the week before christmas to watch.
Hope the the above makes sense and i dont mean to cause offence to anyone. i am just airing my thoughts! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by MM on Nov 21, 2006 12:56:25 GMT
good luck at the final.
I had a welsh cob there a few years ago, its not easy to keep the M&M's going until Xmas. Knightmare decision as to what to do with the coat!
But its all worth it we had the most amazing time, defintely what dreams are made of!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by maybe on Nov 21, 2006 13:24:25 GMT
I agree it wont affect all producers, the Harforths, Hollins, Templetons, Lawrence etc all have other riders it will just affect the small producers ie Carol Issac, Sam Roberts, Debbie Baker, Aimee (&^%$ etc etc and also affect people with two ponies.
Is that what everyone wants. I havnt seen any of the above ridern around in mercs have you?
|
|
|
|
Post by ferret on Nov 21, 2006 13:34:40 GMT
It will be interesting to see if this rule comes in or not , it personally wouldnt effect me as i am an amature but can see the nightmare that it would cause for a Producer . Showing is a hobby for me , i currently have an up and coming novice M and M ( cant afford / wouldnt want to pay for an already made one !) that i would hope to qualify in the next two years for Olympia ...it would be such a shame if this fab final was not as prestigous as it currently is in the years ahead ....think the NPS should think very carefully !
The problem is ..as always with showing .. that some Judges are ' bent / biased ' . I have heard a rumour that one particular pony is odds on for winning Olympia if the owner lets the producer ride it ..... will be interesting to see how it does without the producer up top ....?? Surely the judges should judge the pony on its own merit , not on who is on it .....!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Come on on Nov 21, 2006 15:16:56 GMT
This rule makes me mad and agree with what 'mabey' has posted.
This rule will only benefit the people who are working the system to their own advantage currently. It is going to allow the bent comittee members who do each other favours to carry on doing what they are doing already.
And for the record I am not a producer but I have 3 very good open ponies who are olympia standard.........what am I going to do! If I am lucky to qualify one what do I do with the others for the rest of the season.
And Blacknight, I know you are friendly with Linda Impey so I can assume that she is your source??
It stinks.
In reality how often does one person qualify more then one pony? I know last year ML was very lucky and qualified 3,but how often does this occur and affect the rest of us.
Is the NPS following in the footsteps of Puk and just doing what they want.
|
|
|
|
Post by Appeal on Nov 21, 2006 15:30:36 GMT
What do the sponsors think of all this.
If this rule comes in I will make a personal appeal to Baileys because it will not be the most prestigious competition anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by Welsh Cob Rider on Nov 21, 2006 15:50:33 GMT
"Carol Isacc is one of the top M&M producers in the country and has been doing it for a long as I can remember. She has produced more than one for Olympia on two occasions, I believe and won it."
I agree, Carol is one of the top M&M producers in the country, and she does an excellent job. However she does not ride more than one in Olympia qualifiers during a season.
She has 'produced' 2 in Olympia classes last season, however the other one (Wishaw gelding) was being ridden by Charlotte, not by Carol. She may have more than one Open horse, but she will have one No 1. open horse doing Olympia's, and the other one will be doing Silver medal, breed classes etc.
Last year Floreat Angie was Carol's Olympia ride, and this year it has been Felinmor Triple Crown. She did have Triple Crown last year too - but she was doing the non-Olympia open classes with him.
|
|
|
|
Post by pear on Nov 21, 2006 16:28:56 GMT
We have 2 ponies competing in the same olympia class and aren't producers but enthusiasts. If this rule is introduced and both our ponies qualified would we have to decide which to enter for the final or could we only compete one pony next year. Sounds a bit loopy if they want to encourage people to enter as there are many like us.
|
|
|
|
Post by agree on Nov 21, 2006 17:00:39 GMT
"Carol Isacc is one of the top M&M producers in the country and has been doing it for a long as I can remember. She has produced more than one for Olympia on two occasions, I believe and won it." I agree, Carol is one of the top M&M producers in the country, and she does an excellent job. However she does not ride more than one in Olympia qualifiers during a season. She has 'produced' 2 in Olympia classes last season, however the other one (Wishaw gelding) was being ridden by Charlotte, not by Carol. She may have more than one Open horse, but she will have one No 1. open horse doing Olympia's, and the other one will be doing Silver medal, breed classes etc. Last year Floreat Angie was Carol's Olympia ride, and this year it has been Felinmor Triple Crown. She did have Triple Crown last year too - but she was doing the non-Olympia open classes with him. Thats because she mainly does welsh and it would be difficult to produce two D's for Olympia. I would think if she was offered an open C she would most definatetly take it. |
|
|
|
Post by dillis on Nov 21, 2006 18:51:57 GMT
Surely Rider it would mean that both horse and rider would be banned from competeing in any other qualifiers, what if the rider were to qualify two ponies under the new rule they could only take one hence reducing the actual competitors at Olympia Sorry Dillis I dont quite understand what you mean sorry. This rule not only effects producers, if you were lucky enough, which I beleive you are, to own two Olympia standard ponies, does it mean you have to decide which one to compete on. If you qualified your first pony early you would then have to leave you other top class horse at home, that to me is not competition. Rider just to put the record straight I (with alittle help from my family ) am lucky enough to own 1 super pony who is of olympia standard, my sister in law and a very good friend own the other pony who is Olympia bound this year so the rule won't affect us, but I can't see what the NPS are trying to achieve if they perceive they have a problem I think it should have been aired at an AGM maybe and I personally think as I have said before 2 judges and a marking system would go along way to making it better. Just look at the entries for HOYS qualifiers 25 plus in many classes whereas at our local Olympia qualifier there was 5ish in one class!! ( and that was a large breed class ) speaks for itself I think |
|
|
|
Post by joke on Nov 21, 2006 21:33:22 GMT
Perhaps you lot should find out which council members voted for it, I am told it does not appear in the council minutes and it's the breed societies that are in favour.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fishy on Nov 21, 2006 21:58:12 GMT
If it doesn't feature in the council minutes then it can't be implemented as it won't have been passed. Perhaps someone should find out whether this ill advised supposed rule is fictitious rumour rather than fact. It coud be a red herring to wind everyone on this site up! If it is then council won't be left with egg on their face! If it isn't they have an escape route as by omitting it from the minutes they can sit in complete denial and make out it never happened. That could prove to be the wisest move of the season |
|
|
|
Post by sad on Nov 21, 2006 22:01:21 GMT
I think this is Linda Impey law, ring her and find out for yourselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Nov 21, 2006 22:08:00 GMT
I think this is Linda Impey law, ring her and find out for yourselves. Doubt that, Mrs Impey is one of the fairest, most honest people we've voted onto the council. More likely she's been set up so she doesn't get voted in as chairman next time so the crooked crowd can take over. There are plenty of them on it  |
|
|
|
Post by Early riser on Nov 22, 2006 6:22:23 GMT
I think this is Linda Impey law, ring her and find out for yourselves. Doubt that, Mrs Impey is one of the fairest, most honest people we've voted onto the council. More likely she's been set up so she doesn't get voted in as chairman next time so the crooked crowd can take over. There are plenty of them on it I agree she is very fair but there was another council member who has openly posted on this site. Perhaps they could come on here and verify a few points. I understand they are friendly with Blacknight also, so dont blame one of the best chairman's we have had. Again it is down to us we voted them all on (or didnt bother to vote). PS how do you know they are not in the minutes are we allowed to look at them? |
|
|
|
Post by soton on Nov 22, 2006 6:39:14 GMT
Believe it's possible to make an appointment with the secretary to view them at NPS
|
|
|
|
Post by Anon on Nov 22, 2006 9:29:54 GMT
Last year i decided to attend the nps agm and was a little shocked to see just how many members didnt vote ! Think their were about 700 in total That actualloy voted (cant remember exact ) So when we all feel we are being pushed into a corner re new rules etc .... maybe we should all vote, surely thats worth the price of a stamp !
And FYI i also have it on good authority that this isnt yet a rule and was due to be voted on yesterday ! Also if you scroll back thru the threads ( they were asking for views) you will see a certain person went before the commitee at last years championship show and proposed this rule !
|
|
