Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equestrian is about skill but not athletic prowess. It should be taken out of the Olympics.

And you have to be insanely rich to get to the level of the Olympics. The training costs, the transportation costs, the costs of the horses etc.

It is also a pretty elitist, snobby sport. The poor wouldn't be welcome even if someone sponsored them to get there.

And dressage is kind of cruel. To me it is like using animals in a circus. Horses don't naturally dance. Just like tigers don't naturally jump through rings of fire.

Every single one of these statements is wrong.

how many poor or middle class equestrians are representing the US at the olympics?

Actually the Olympics probably has more riders who came from less affluent backgrounds than the levels below that because international caliber riders can attract sponsorship. McLain ward comes from an industry family, but not super wealth. I think Laura kraut is the same and Kent Harrington didn’t have industry connections at all, he’s just amazingly talented and worked very hard and got the right breaks and support. But yeah, someone on the team has to have mega bucks, it just doesn’t have to be the rider.

Karl cook does have a very wealthy parent supporting him and he bought his horse (who is incredible) when she was already top level for what we can assume was millions. So you can finger point at him. And it’s true the sport requires a lot of money and has drifted from national sponsorship to private.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equestrian is about skill but not athletic prowess. It should be taken out of the Olympics.

And you have to be insanely rich to get to the level of the Olympics. The training costs, the transportation costs, the costs of the horses etc.

It is also a pretty elitist, snobby sport. The poor wouldn't be welcome even if someone sponsored them to get there.

And dressage is kind of cruel. To me it is like using animals in a circus. Horses don't naturally dance. Just like tigers don't naturally jump through rings of fire.

Every single one of these statements is wrong.

how many poor or middle class equestrians are representing the US at the olympics?

Team USA rider Natalie Dean:
https://lane-press.mydigitalpublication.com/publication/?i=741508&article_id=4235699&view=articleBrowser

https://sidelinesmagazine.com/sidelines-spotlight/natalie-dean-riding-to-represent.html

Team Ecuador rider's horse was purchased for $20
https://www.horseandhound.co.uk/features/olympic-dressage-jewels-goldstrike-866545

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equestrian is about skill but not athletic prowess. It should be taken out of the Olympics.

And you have to be insanely rich to get to the level of the Olympics. The training costs, the transportation costs, the costs of the horses etc.

It is also a pretty elitist, snobby sport. The poor wouldn't be welcome even if someone sponsored them to get there.

And dressage is kind of cruel. To me it is like using animals in a circus. Horses don't naturally dance. Just like tigers don't naturally jump through rings of fire.

Every single one of these statements is wrong.

how many poor or middle class equestrians are representing the US at the olympics?

Anonymous wrote:Equestrian is about skill but not athletic prowess. It should be taken out of the Olympics.

And you have to be insanely rich to get to the level of the Olympics. The training costs, the transportation costs, the costs of the horses etc.

It is also a pretty elitist, snobby sport. The poor wouldn't be welcome even if someone sponsored them to get there.

And dressage is kind of cruel. To me it is like using animals in a circus. Horses don't naturally dance. Just like tigers don't naturally jump through rings of fire.

Yeah I want to be on your team but every one of these is a terrible argument.

Anonymous wrote:Equestrian is about skill but not athletic prowess. It should be taken out of the Olympics.

And you have to be insanely rich to get to the level of the Olympics. The training costs, the transportation costs, the costs of the horses etc.

It is also a pretty elitist, snobby sport. The poor wouldn't be welcome even if someone sponsored them to get there.

And dressage is kind of cruel. To me it is like using animals in a circus. Horses don't naturally dance. Just like tigers don't naturally jump through rings of fire.

Every single one of these statements is wrong.

Equestrian is about skill but not athletic prowess. It should be taken out of the Olympics.

And you have to be insanely rich to get to the level of the Olympics. The training costs, the transportation costs, the costs of the horses etc.

It is also a pretty elitist, snobby sport. The poor wouldn't be welcome even if someone sponsored them to get there.

And dressage is kind of cruel. To me it is like using animals in a circus. Horses don't naturally dance. Just like tigers don't naturally jump through rings of fire.

If anyone is enjoying casually watching Olympic equestrian and also wants an amazing summer beach-type read, I highly recommend Riders by Jilly Cooper! Features Olympic show jumping and is super juicy and fun.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[list]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's nice that unathletic wealthy people still have a way to compete in the olympics

I grew up on a horse farm, and I competed in dressage and three-day eventing/show jumping for years. You DO have to be athletic, actually. We ran, did weights, and there was intense pressure to maintain a certain body weight and form. Riding is not just sitting, despite what you may believe. I had an aunt who had been a prima ballerina and ran a dance school, and it always seemed to me that the physical demands and pressure re: body image and training on the ballerinas was similar to what you find in the upper competitive circles of elite equestrian sports. (Not that I was ever allowed to or invited to dance: ballet and riding train muscles the "opposite" way, so one destroys the potential and capacity to engage in the other at the elite level).

I think this is really a stretch.

I competed at a high level in hunter/jumper competition a few decades ago and was told the same thing. Running was also discouraged because it would shorten my Achilles tendon.

Well, we all get told some pretty stupid things.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a middling rider (adult jumpers, 1.10m). It’s not that taxing. Sure, it requires fitness. High level fitness to compete at the higher levels. But it’s more about coordination, skill, finesse, experience, etc. But a lot of Olympic sports are like that. They’re not all feats of power.

There’s a reason the Olympic equestrian disciplines have the oldest athletes and both genders.

A few decades ago, I competed in the junior jumpers - then there were no "low" divisions - you jumped 4'6" and occasionally 4'9" (so 1.40m to 1.45m). The higher the jumps get, the more athletic the rider needs to be. It's not a pure cardio or pure strength sport, which is while older riders can continue to compete. But you need to be a significant outlier to the general population in terms of strength and general fitness.

I've always compared riding to a SolidCore class, but one where the resistance is constantly being changed on you.

Well sure, but I think it’s like “can comfortably run a 10k” fitness level, not like other Olympic sports. We’ve all watched old campaigner riders hobble and wheeze away from amazing Grand Prix rounds. I’m just saying the Olympic riders aren’t in the Olympics because they’re more fit/athletic than other riders, it’s because they’re better riders who are also fit. I know a lot of them work out intensely and feel it gives them an edge, but some don’t. Was Nick Skelton at peak fitness in 2012? No, but he was fit enough and better than everyone else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a middling rider (adult jumpers, 1.10m). It’s not that taxing. Sure, it requires fitness. High level fitness to compete at the higher levels. But it’s more about coordination, skill, finesse, experience, etc. But a lot of Olympic sports are like that. They’re not all feats of power.

There’s a reason the Olympic equestrian disciplines have the oldest athletes and both genders.

A few decades ago, I competed in the junior jumpers - then there were no "low" divisions - you jumped 4'6" and occasionally 4'9" (so 1.40m to 1.45m). The higher the jumps get, the more athletic the rider needs to be. It's not a pure cardio or pure strength sport, which is while older riders can continue to compete. But you need to be a significant outlier to the general population in terms of strength and general fitness.

I've always compared riding to a SolidCore class, but one where the resistance is constantly being changed on you.

If that was true, there would never 50 let alone 60 year old competitors.

What was the event that has them riding horses and shooting? There was a big issue with someone being mean to their horse.

I used to love watching the equestrian events mostly for the horses. But then I started reading about all of the abuse during training and it made me less interested.

Anonymous wrote:[list]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's nice that unathletic wealthy people still have a way to compete in the olympics

I grew up on a horse farm, and I competed in dressage and three-day eventing/show jumping for years. You DO have to be athletic, actually. We ran, did weights, and there was intense pressure to maintain a certain body weight and form. Riding is not just sitting, despite what you may believe. I had an aunt who had been a prima ballerina and ran a dance school, and it always seemed to me that the physical demands and pressure re: body image and training on the ballerinas was similar to what you find in the upper competitive circles of elite equestrian sports. (Not that I was ever allowed to or invited to dance: ballet and riding train muscles the "opposite" way, so one destroys the potential and capacity to engage in the other at the elite level).

I think this is really a stretch.

I competed at a high level in hunter/jumper competition a few decades ago and was told the same thing. Running was also discouraged because it would shorten my Achilles tendon.

Anonymous wrote:I’m a middling rider (adult jumpers, 1.10m). It’s not that taxing. Sure, it requires fitness. High level fitness to compete at the higher levels. But it’s more about coordination, skill, finesse, experience, etc. But a lot of Olympic sports are like that. They’re not all feats of power.

There’s a reason the Olympic equestrian disciplines have the oldest athletes and both genders.

A few decades ago, I competed in the junior jumpers - then there were no "low" divisions - you jumped 4'6" and occasionally 4'9" (so 1.40m to 1.45m). The higher the jumps get, the more athletic the rider needs to be. It's not a pure cardio or pure strength sport, which is while older riders can continue to compete. But you need to be a significant outlier to the general population in terms of strength and general fitness.

I've always compared riding to a SolidCore class, but one where the resistance is constantly being changed on you.

[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No dressage should go. Keep the jumping and steeple chase. Keep the beautiful setting but dressage should be put into the horse Olympics only.

There is no steeple chase.

Ok you weirdo. The one where they ran through the woods did jumps and went over the pontoon bridges (yes I did watch that).

That’s the cross country portion of eventing, which also includes dressage (and show jumping). It’s sort of like like triathlon, except there is no Only Cross Country discipline.

They should have more of that and kill the ridiculous horse dancing part.

Dressage is really the foundation of the rest of it. The dressage horses and riders are specialists, and the eventers are pretty good, but all the jumpers could do some reasonably high level of dressage (idk because I don’t do it and I’d have to look up the specifics of each test? A dressage person help me out).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No dressage should go. Keep the jumping and steeple chase. Keep the beautiful setting but dressage should be put into the horse Olympics only.

There is no steeple chase.

Ok you weirdo. The one where they ran through the woods did jumps and went over the pontoon bridges (yes I did watch that).

That’s the cross country portion of eventing, which also includes dressage (and show jumping). It’s sort of like like triathlon, except there is no Only Cross Country discipline.

They should have more of that and kill the ridiculous horse dancing part.