Youth WC?

Just continuing the post that stemmed off of Fav OKC Moment for anonymous….here is what was written.

This is a bit off the point, but I don’t know how to start a new post….
Don’t you think Youth classes should have a world class? Surely it would help some youth stay in the breed as it is still a progress step between Junior Exhibitor and Ladies/Amateur. Youth Eq would be cool also!

My response is sure!  I also do not understand why all year my daughter who could show in JE and Youth hunter classes with the same horse but cannot in Okl??  Can anyone enlighten me?

23 Responses to Youth WC?

  1. suziep says:

    I don’t have a answer to your question, but i have one question about on the same lines is.Why is it that you have to have a different horse to show in the Master classes, you can not use the horse that you show in the amateur classes , i hope that makes sense.

  2. Trisha says:

    With youth, I agree that there should be a world class and not just the “finals”. The whole purpose of youth classes is for youth to have experience with an open class without competing against the seasoned pros.

    And about the amateur masters. That doesn’t really make sense to me. I could understand the rules being that the same horse/rider couldn’t go in masters and amateur, but not letting the horse go in any other doesn’t completely make sense. Though we did just find out at OKC that the horse may enter another amateur class so long as it is something like “LADIES amateur…” instead of “amateur ladies”.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Youth used to have WC classes I think, but the division became very light in numbers and the schedule was adjusted, IIRC. Youth is a tough division…it is popular back east, and it should be, but the classes don’t even exist out west. Therefore you can’t require qualifying…this might add to the lack of a WC as well. Also, you used to be able to show in both. I think the division was split because they really are 2 different divisions and need to be treated as such and keep clear lines…not just add another Jr Ebx class. These are to be Open classes and allow Stallions…should people let their 11 yr old take her cute little mare in there it sort of hinders that possibly.
    As for the Masters, the division was created to split the ama division…therefore, to let them show in both is not only defeating the purpose but it gives the masters an unfair advantage of additional classes as there are none that are only for under 50 (or whatever the masters cutoff age is).
    BTW…Ladies ama is not an ama class..this is a little confusing and I think alot of people don’t realize, but the first word defines the specs of the class, the second word in simply a way to split it much like “mares” or “stallion and gelding” but using the riders. SO…a ladies ama class is a ladies class to be judged under ladies specs but the rider must be an ama. Similarly, an ama ladies class is to be judged as an ama class with a lady rider. Therefore, the ama division has been split by agegroup basically…like the kids classes. Under 50 (or 55?) and over. They do allow the overs to have the choice of where to show, but that is the premise. To let them show in both just wouldn’t work, I don’t think.
    HOWEVER…I didn’t realize that the same rider with 2 different horses cannot show in the classic equitation and the open equitation. I always thought that if they had a classic horse for one and a different horse for the other they could…and I think they should be able to! To limit the classes kids can enter is silly, IMO.

  4. Amanda says:

    I too wish they had a WC for youth. The youth classes seem to be pretty full. It is a very real probability that I am going to lease my mare out to a youth rider to show Youth Park Saddle. I would love to see her show her at OKC, but It is hard to justify the trip out there from New England for one class.

    I too think the masters classes need a little more structure. Why do they get to choose which section of AM they would like to show in, when any AM under 50 does not have the choice. Also while they can not show the same horse in Masters and “regular” AM, they can show 2 different horses, one is AM, and one in Masters. What if someone under 50 wanted to show 2 differnt horses in the same division at OKC, they again do not have that option.

    I am all for the Masters division, but I agree it needs to be like JR. EX and defined by age.

  5. your_starr says:

    I would love for there to be more youth classes. I show in the open classes since I *technically* “make my living” teaching lessons, but I know I would get burried at bigger shows. I believe the age for youth is 18-22? Is there a minimum age?

  6. colwilrin says:

    I agree that the masters should stay differentiated from the regular amateur. It was my understanding that the division was started with the thought of allowing a place for newer older riders to compete without having to be thrown into a pack of younger riders with much more experience. It was based on the RIDER’S age and ability. They shouldn’t be able to change horses and suddenly have the ability to compete in the regular amateur divison. If they are able to compete with the those younger riders, then what is the point of having a masters division?

  7. Anonymous says:

    I don’t think it should have anything to do with ability. Age, OK…ability, no. To create a “lesser” World Championship is a big mistake, IMO. If I want to run in a marathon in the olympics but am too slow, I don’t get to go in the slow people’s marathon, I have to work harder, strive harder and compete with the rest. I just don’t think there should ever be a “cheap” WC class…and I think that is a little of what they did when they limited the classic/open equitation. They tried to make it so that the kids that thought they had a chance at winning the open wouldn’t go against the classic kids. The better the competition, the better you become, IMO. If you have easier divisions, nobody will strive to get better and WC’s become less prestigeous. All of the dividing concerns me. Should our WC show ever get to where classes are small I think we will be in a heap of trouble!
    PS…youth is under 21…no minimum. That is part of the reason the West does not have it at alot of shows…it is illegal for a minor to show a stallion in Ca. That and it interferes with the ama division. To the person with the youth park horse, they can show it youth and ama.

  8. KB77 says:

    I really think they need to have a WC class for Youth. The youth divisions (at least here in the East) are HUGE. Especially Youth hunter pleasure. At NE there were like 25 in the S&G qualifier and 10 in the mares. 35 total! It was more competetive than the jr. exhib, I’d say. You’ve got the highly competetive horses from the jr exhib divisions AND the highly competetive horses from Amateur. That’s some exciting competition! And they really need to allow jr exhibs to show their horses in Youth as well. OKC is extremely expensive and it’s a lot of money to spend to ride in two classes.

  9. Anonymous says:

    What does everyone think of the age of the master division? I thought that the master division was designed to lighten up some of the am. classes. However, with a 50+ age requirement it seems that the master division continues to be light and the am. division continues to be heavy in entries…..especially in the hunter division. Isn’t there a Saddlebred division which has a 39 and over am. division (i.e. our version of the Am. Masters)??? Just a thought…but it seems to me that the age requirements for the am. master classes needs to change.

  10. bella says:

    Those are my thoughts, EXACTLY! We are on the east coast and all year we showed in both JE and Youth, and eq at some shows, it is CRAZY to go to OKL for 2 classes! And my daughter was in the youth at NE and Mass Morgan and the classes where huge and very competitive, I saw mostly “older” juniors along with those from 18-21 in there. All the hunter JE classes where huge as always so I did not see it at all taking away from those classe, it just gave people more options and more classes to show in. Who can we write to for consideration of a change, does anyone know?

  11. anonymous says:

    Didnt OKC used to have “Youth 17 and Under” and then a “youth 18-21″ as seperate divisions? What happened to that?

  12. your_starr says:

    I think youth should be from 18-22. Thats the age when we’re out of JE but might not compete against the seasoned trainers in the open classes. It would be perfect for those of us that are the younger trainers out there, without getting burried by everyone thats been doing it for ages.

  13. KB77 says:

    I also forgot to mention that I’m completely for Youth Equitation classes. That would be great for me beause I don’t have an equitation horse right now but I’m really good at eq and would love to do it.

  14. Anonymous says:

    So, if there were 35 in the youth hunter pleasure at NE, I would assume that the Jr riders rode Jr Exb and the over 18′s went ama at OKC? I hate to see either division become diluted. I know they are big, but they SHOULD be! I would have no issue letting people show Jr Exb and youth but I am still not convinced we need youth champs. How many were in the youth park saddle? Harness? Pleasure driving? English Pleasure I think had 8-9 but that was the biggest of those divisions. If they want to add youth champs for hunt and western, that is one thing, but it will adversly effect the SS divisions, IMO if they add them there.

  15. IED says:

    I am all for adding a WC for the Hunt and Western divisions, as Stacy mentioned. At this time I don’t think the numbers for Park Harness/Saddle and English Pleasure/Pleasure Driving are strong enough to make for a WC, unless of course the Junior Exhibitors are taken into account.

    Personally, I love Youth. I do wish they would enlarge the age margin, though to something like 18-25. Especially since the majority of the Youth division is in college and without a show horse…

  16. GraceMorgn says:

    I was always under the impression that youth was created for the open horse ridden by the young exbibitor. The rules say “Youth classes are to be judged in accordance with Open class specifications, open to exhibitors 21 and under.” These are suppossed to be the horses that are higher quality and ability, but lack the perfect manners and suitability of a junior exhibitor horse. I believe the intent was to give the talented younger riders a place to showcase their horse without having to be in the open division with the professionals.

    A youth horse is more similar to an amateur horse than a junior exibitor horse. Therefore, you are allowed to cross enter between amatuer, ladies, gentleman and youth at Nationals. Some youth horses would not meet the ladies requirement, so that should be taken into consideration.

    I do believe that extending youth to age 25 would be very beneficial. It would allow those of us who are out of college and relatively established to have a section to reenter the show ring after a few years off.


  17. Anonymous says:

    I disagree I think the numbers in the English Pleasure justify a WC class…this year there were 8-9 and the year befor like 14 and correct me if i’m wrong the majority did not show in any other classes. Look at the Masters world class there was only like 7 and the year before about 5…how come they justify a WC class and the youth’s don’t…it just doesn’t make any sense in my opinion. I really think if you made it a WC class numbers would go up too. People don’t want to ship all that way and have all the high costs that OKC brings to just show in one finals class.

  18. Anonymous says:

    Technically there is a WC for the Youth Division- You can show back in the OPEN WC classes..

  19. suziep says:

    about the Master classes , I think why they are light , Is or for me i want to show in the masters and amat, and be able to use the same horse. It would been more entry money for both classes. Some Amateur do not have 2 horses , or if they do you have to pick which one to ride. and Money is always the key factor.

  20. Anonymous says:

    IMO, 8-9 is not enough to create a class for. I don’t remember what divisions have WC classes for ama’s, but not all of them do. Park saddle and harness both, I believe, are feeder classes into the WC ama class.
    Is there a reason that those youth riders can’t show ama as well? Or Open?

  21. Anonymous says:

    If we’re realistic no youth is going to show back open, and if they have a horse thats competitive enough to go after the open WC then there most likey gunna show in the open qualifier too. I didn’t think the youth finals could show back in the Am division? But what if their not Am they could be young proffesionals?
    8-9 is the same numbers as most of the SS WC classes anyway…i really think it would be a good move to add it…IMO it woud keep more youths in the breed for longer. Look how big the youth qualifiers and championships are at NE…and the majority of those don’t show Junior Exhibitor. It could be kept that you still don’t have to qualify surely in order to avoid the problem due to the law in California.
    I see how the park saddle, park harness and perhaps pleasure driving may not merit a world class..but the others i really think have the numbers they need, and would grow some with the addition of a WC.

  22. your_starr says:

    I think we need to run the classes to know what the numbers would be like.

  23. I showed in the Youth the last year I aged out of junior exhibitor. I showed as an amature. I won the youth qualifier and took my horse back in the Open WC. We placed 3rd. We also showed in the amature classes and amature WC classes. This year I showed in my last year of Youth. I took that same horse in the 4 year old junior qualifer and he went back into the WC junior horse. There is PLENTY to show in, I do not think that a WC should be added. It’s just fine the way it is- Why screw up a good thing?


Leave a Reply