Hey guys I thought I would toss this idea I had out to the eastern zone Trillium community...

What if end of year points were calculated using a variation of World Cup points rules with the best six shows to count in the final standing for each division. Currently all points from all shows count.

Some people would opt to do only six shows (some already do) and some would do most of the shows to try and improve their best six results.

Thoughts...does anyone think that this might improve the quality/soundness of horses going to the Championships...

Verve...you might be on to something here.
I think this raises some good points, lots to consider of course, but worth exploring in my opinion.

Verve, you totally hit the nail on the head. I completely agree with taking only the top N shows to count toward points, particularly in a circuit where there seems to be a show every weekend. In fact, I noticed the bronze shows are now counting only the top 5 toward year-end points. Is this new? I think it's a great idea.

i think that's a great idea!

I think that is a great idea - saves the horse, the pocket book and makes you consider which events to attend.

I like the idea

Good idea, but can you really see the barns that host the shows going for it? Barns that run fantastic shows but fall victim to bad footing or weather end up losing money because people can just opt to not do the show...
The horse industry in this area is already so lacking...and I think it's in everyones' interests to keep all of the barns that work hard to run these shows happy and able to run future shows

I think it's a great idea!

As for the barns losing money, I don't think that is a big concern. Everyone is different and some people just LOVE to show at Fiddlers, while others consider Ashland their favorite venue. I think it would even out.

I hear a lot of people complaining about the same shows...everybody knows certain barns to have certain types of footing..I dunno how many this show season I'd hear people say "oh well its rained all week and "this" barn has crappy footing to begin with..or well I don't like "that" shows jumper ring so im just not going to bother...

I think in theory it's a good idea..we just need to figure out a way it happens without the chance of making some of our shows disappear due to lack of entries..

That's what they do in other circuits (dressage, for example)... gives you a chance that if you have a weekend where you just CAN'T make it to a show, you don't miss out on points.

It used to be that you had to attend at least 1/2 the shows (ie if there were 10 shows, then you would have to attend 5 of them) to go to Trillium Hunter Champs. That made it so that if you only went to 4 shows (in this example) and had more points that everyone else, you still hadn't qualified...

I'm sure you could find a way to make it work!

I agree...excellent idea verve

Is each zone free to determine how they qualify the horses? Is this a change that could easily be made within this zone or does there have to be some consultation with the Trillium Hunter/Jumper Association?

Sounds like a good idea to me.

brilliant!

Great Idea!!! How do we put in a proposal. Who will take responsibility for seeing this through?

I have a question...why do Trillium shows not hold mini prix classes? I mean, it can run as a non-core division, even at select shows..but you have Ashland and Wester offering mini prix classes at bronze shows, which I LOVE, but would it not be nice to have a 3'3 or 3'9 mini prix at trillium shows?

I looove this idea! I think this is how the Schooling Shows used to be a few years back, but then it became a total amount for all shows attended.
To the comments that it might limit entries, I actually think the opposite might happen. People who are currently discouraged from going to Trillium shows because they can only afford 5 or 6 shows and know they won't be competetive for year end results because of this may want to return to the show ring.
I also think it would be great for those horses that do 2 or 3 divisions plus equitation at each show to save them from jumping around so many courses in one summer.
Shouldn't it be that the best horse/rider combination is the winner for year end results, not the OK horse/rider who did the most shows?

quote:

Originally posted by Stinky:
I looove this idea! I think this is how the Schooling Shows used to be a few years back, but then it became a total amount for all shows attended.
To the comments that it might limit entries, I actually think the opposite might happen. People who are currently discouraged from going to Trillium shows because they can only afford 5 or 6 shows and know they won't be competetive for year end results because of this may want to return to the show ring.
I also think it would be great for those horses that do 2 or 3 divisions plus equitation at each show to save them from jumping around so many courses in one summer.
Shouldn't it be that the best horse/rider combination is the winner for year end results, not the OK horse/rider who did the most shows?

I like the last part there, totally true. I know some people who have lots of money attended all like 11 or 12 shows, and did OKAY each show, where as some people did 6 or 7 shows and did awesome, but couldn't afford to not be bumped out.

So true! ..way fair that way

As far as I am concerned that is basically
how it is working now. People are free to enter what shows they want, as long as they
show the required amount of shows. On our circuit I believe that is six. If you place well in those six shows, in a field of 25 horses you will qualify. We only did seven shows this year and easily qualified in the top seven, out of a very large division.
There is no way even if you choose only to do three shows, does that depict whether or not your the best horse/rider combination. Just because you placed first in two shows, does not
actually give the full picture. If that is the case than we can take it a bit further and say well anyone that took a first place ribbon should get to go to the champs... doesn't make sense to me. All shows/courses and course disigners are NOT created equal, so how would you monitor that. Seems to me our showing this year, at least in the jumper rings, were not the best, even though we were the top zone.
I think the better notion would be to allow zones like the eastern, to qualify more than seven riders. Doesn't seem fair to me that a small zone like Georgian bay who maybe only have 5 shows in a year, gets to qualify seven.
Most of the division this year, like all other years were not full. 7 zones X 7 riders =49 horse. Large zones should be able to qualify up to 10 people, that should help with the number of shows, one has to attend.
Six shows is not a lot to ask someone to attend, it is enough to give a complete picture of a rider/horse combination.

i agree with everything you said oldladyonatb, except for your last sentence. many people can't afford to do even six shows. they could have a great horse/pony and do fantastically in the six shows they were able to afford but get knocked out by the people that do all 12 or 11 shows. its giving everyone a fair chance.

Hello oldladyonatb,

I think I know who you are and you were very, very slick in your division. Everyone else in your large divsion, over 25, did almost all the shows and and was not able to qualify. As I stated before and you kind of proved my point...if we only took the top six shows, a la World Cup points, then you would have still qualified and gone to the champs...

As a zone we did very well. I just know if some horse / rider combinations who were very good who did not do all the shows and were not able to qualify, but should have gone. I was just trying to think of a system that would select the best and still be fair.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: verve,