My brother is a professional race car mechanic. No kidding. He's worked in NASCAR, and for an American LeMans Series team. This weekend, he worked a race called the 24 hours of Daytona. Apparently there was a great shot of him sleeping standing up on Speed in the wee hours. I followed the race on FaceBook. Early on, the car had some issues with the gearbox, but they thought they resolved the problem. They were running well. And in hour 23, the gear box failed and the race, for them, was over.
Sucks, right? As my brother puts it "That's racing."
Yeah. There's hundreds of thousands of dollars on the line, in building the car, and prepping it for the day of the race. I don't know what it costs to actually enter the race, or pay the team that cares for that car. And despite all the money and all that work...they can't even place, they are Did Not Finish.
That's Racing.
I swear it will make sense in a moment.
So. If you took a moment to actually read the NAN packet when you enter, you'd see that there's a note that classes that have fewer than 20 horses entered in a given class (or if less than 20 actually show up on the table--a lot of times not all the horses who are entered show) then half the class is pinned, and its not a Top Ten, its a Top Seven, or whatever. Its been like that since 1995. Some of its economic--prizes are about $60 per class, and if you have 20 horses entered, the class breaks even. Some if it is in the spirit of competition--to earn that rosette, you have to beat someone, not just show up.
You don't get a prize just for showing up.
I know, right?
NAN is not a member show. Its our National Championship show. Those awards should mean *something* that isn't "I paid my entry fee and got up on time."
And no, we don't track horses who qualify. So you have to compete against what actually shows up that day, not what is hypothetically qualified to be there, but isn't for some reason. Using that logic, its possible that the True Best Horse Ever never gets to a show, because not everyone who collects stuff--even resins, even CMs, even tack--shows it. I realize that seems like a waste to those of us who do, but its true. So you have to be judged against what shows up to compete, not what is hypothetically going to compete.
And while I agree that a good, consistant sponsorship program is something NAN and NAMHSA desperately need...I don't think its ethical to be able to just create a class to sponsor. You get to pick what the NAN committee offers. If you get to create a class--say Traditional scale CM Glaze Walkaloosa, bay base color, then you sure as hell don't get to show in it. Its cheaper to just make your own trophy.
Should we just give out "PARTICIPATION" ribbons with the NAN packet? Or maybe just forget the show and let people order trophies on demand? That would save the org money and a lot of aggravation, certainly. It would also make your cookie worthless.
It would be awesome if we could all count on winning a championship at every show we go to, but that doesn't happen. Sometimes all you get to show for an effort is the experience. I spent a lot of time and money on the 1999 NAN and I think I got one Top Ten to show for it. I've been just nudged out of champs at local shows and missed a National Reserve by a point. I suppose I could waste time being furious about how I'd been cheated out of a prize...but that's showing.
If actual professionals can have this attitude about competition, why on earth don't we, who are doing it, in theory, because we enjoy it? Do we enjoy just having the prizes?
Posts
On the beach + today's photo
2 hours ago
Absolutely.
ReplyDeleteSue Stewart
Excuse my lack to knowledge about auto racin, but I don't think you're analogy is equivalent to the situation of combining unrelated classes at NAN. A car breaking down and being unable to finis a race is more like bringing a horse to
ReplyDeleteNAN and having it break just before the class. A better analogy would qualifying your stock car, bringing it to the track and finding out that instead of a stock car race, you'regoing to have to compete against stock cars, Formula one cars, dragsters, street rods and a couple of stray Matchbox cars that didn't fit anywhere else. My lack of racing knowledge means I'mm not sure, but I think all thos different kinds cars comnpete uder different conditions, with different rules. In auto racing, as in most other conpetitions, the goalis to compete lie with like. After all, cars or model horses, they qualified for their event competing against similqar competitors and it seems perfectly reasonable that in determining who has the best that it should also be a competition of like against like. Granted, at this time we may not always have 20 model horses that alike and present at any one NAN, but I believe that if NAHMSA holds those classes and does not combine stock, drag and Formula 1 entries into one competition, it will benefit NAHMSA in the long run. The competition will grow to fill ths underfilled classes, ths will encourage people to show more horses and will encourage more people to show at NAN. Bringing in more, different people will expand the potential pool of volunteers. So I see the costs associated with placing a full top ten in each class (or as far entries allow).as an investment in the hobby.
Also, while I saw dissagreement, I didn't see the whining you spoke of. Perhaps you read posts I didn't see. Remember, just because a NAN packet says only classes of X size will get a full top ten, that's a choice that can be changed. After all, recent changes made NAN cards good for four years instead of the former two years. The hobby and the organization are dynamic and can respond tochanging conditions and ideas. I think minimizing the combinig of classes and pinning a full top ten are ideas whose time has come.
Sandy Tomezik
I think you may have misunderstood my point, Sandy. I am not arguing against all small classes. I am arguing placing those classes to the bottom. And I think if the hobby has decided that just getting a rosette for a small class is something that they want, then they are going to have to accept other changes to make that feasable---such as raising the entry fee. If the fee were raised from $3 per class, to $5, the break even point moves to 12 horses per class, which makes pinning a small class better from an economics sense. I do not expect NAN to ever turn a profit, but I do want to limit the number of times it lost $17,000 (2011)
ReplyDeleteI co-chaired NAN in 2010, and I was responsible for creating some of that classlist--most of the CM GLaze china classes were very small. I know I had 2 CMG foal classes where there had previously been 1 before, but for that show I had enough entered that I had a split that made sense in trying to keep like type with like types. It just was not possible to create 5 or 6 CMG foal classes with 2 or 3 entries yet.
I'll give another example. In 2010, I had enough CM/AR marathon driving entries that I split them out of the harness class. I believe I had 6--I did not have enough of any other type to divide it further. In 2012, when I was entering the CM/AR driving class, I really hoped for a split and there wasn't one. When I actually looked at the class, I could see why--I think there were just under 20 entries, but only 2 or 3 of each style--pleasure, dressage, draft, parade type stuff, marathon, fine, I am sure I am missing something as well. I was third in that class (and the champ and reserve absolutely deserved it--they were amazing and beautiful entries) There is just not the money, time or manpower (remember, each class needs 3 judges and there were not enough to run 3 or 4 of these classes at the same time) to split that class into 5 or 6. I would much rather have the Top Ten in a class of 20, then to have gotten a champ over the 2 other marathon entries there that day. The Top Ten in that big class is more meaningful award to me then that trophy would have been.
If the hobby were more willing to make other changes to NAN (eliminate the three judge system for example--that would loosen up some of the issues we have with the sheer number of people needed to run the show, as well as maybe freeing up some money that would go to pay judges. People also do not like it when the show runs very late--the last 3 years, the long day of NAN has finished around /before 8 pm instead of midnight, and this has been viewed as a good thing--if we were willing to continue into the wee hours, we could have time to add a ton more classes. I have heard that real breed champ shows do sometimes go into the wee hours of the morning!) then probably, NAMHSA could entertain the idea of having a single breed class for every single breed that enters and pinning all those classes to the bottom.
There's probably always going to be some compromise, and I wish that people could understand that.
Thanks for taking the time to reply, Sandy---will you be at NAN this year, seeing as how its relatively close?
In the real horse world, you don't get to show in a class exclusively full of apples or oranges either. Here in the UK, it's common to find combined classes for British Native Ponies, for example. Now in theory, because they originate here, we should be overrun with the buggers. But even at County level (=Class A), it's not uncommon to find just ONE class for everything from a Shetland to a Welsh Cob. People evidently quickly forget that you are NOT judging Unlike against Unlike - you are judging *each* against their *own* breed requirements.
ReplyDeleteAs for pinning small classes all the way down to the bottom, I don't see *that* happening IRL either.
NAN is the best of the models *forward* in North America in any given year. That should be reflected in how the classes are placed. A ribbon at NAN is explicitly a TOP award - an award for merit, NOT for having the ability to turn up. If people want a ribbon just for turning up, then raise the basic entry fee and stick a ribbon in everyone's show pack. The entrant will have done as much to 'earn' it.
Keren