Before I begin, give this article a read and explore your own thoughts and feelings about the opinions that Katie Prudent has regarding the evolution of our sport, and where it's headed, and what that means for us and the future of competition.

Then, if you feel so inclined, continue reading below for my views on this disputatious topic, as it currently seems to be a controversial conversation in articles all over social media.

Katie Prudent was a talented rider and she makes some aggressive points in this article regarding the lack of skills it takes for an amateur rider to make it in this sport as long as they have a hefty financial backing. I do respect Ms. Prudent in the sense that she has been there, and she has done that. She has risen to the top and accomplished what many of us can only dream of achieving. However, she is looking at our generation as most people her age do in a generic sense, which is with disrespect and distrust for our integrity and our potential.

Firstly, I think that any time you source out a problem with something that you are passionate about and are willing to complain about in front of thousands of people, you also have to contribute some sort of solution. When Katie Prudent states in this article that "unfortunately, because of money, the fearful, talentless amateur can rise to a certain level," she is absolutely correct. However, she is contradicting herself in the way she implicates that statement. The talentless amateur nowadays can rise to a certain level... but they can go no farther than that. In our sport, you can not perform at the highest level without a shred of real talent.. you will literally die.

When Ms. Prudent reflects back on the days when "there was no low childrens' jumpers, modified childrens' jumpers, low junior jumpers," etc. I don't necessarily think that in our day and age, offering lower options at shows with classes of 2'3 and 2'6 is a negative thing. On the contrary, I believe it is progressive of our generation to educate ourselves and introduce green horses to shows at these intermediate levels. I think it is improving the quality of life for these young horses being brought into the competitive world of our sport, building their muscle and confidence before introducing them to bigger jumps and increasing difficulty in courses. Anyone can run around and jump a 3'6 course, but not just anyone can do it well, and with accuracy. With the education and the resources we have now with endless information at our fingertips via the internet, it would actually be incredibly irresponsible of us to continue training horses the way it was done 50 years ago. The oldest way is not always the best way.

Now I'd like to touch on the way Ms. Prudent targets young amateurs making their way through our sport, and how "it's just become a sport for rich, talentless people." I think that it is unfair of Ms. Prudent to paint us all with the same brush and blatantly label us all as spoiled, rich brats with no talent. Instead of driving her bitter bus through this interview, she could have offered some insight or solution to those that are less fortunate, the ones that don't have access to all the money in the world. Besides, this has never been a poor man's sport. Just as she said herself, the individuals that have made it to the top without having a wealthy background just had to work harder for it. It does not mean that it is an impossible journey and that there are none of us left out there and our sport in competition is doomed to fail. I find these statements of hers completely ignorant and empty.

The young riders that do not come from a wealthy background have just as much of a chance as the riders that have access to world class horses and staff and facilities...we just have to work harder for it. This is not a new ideology in the world of equestrians. It has always been this way. Our sport has always been filled with entitled, rich a**holes that don't give a s**t about their horses. But often I find that these are not the people that stick with the sport and climb to the top. Sometimes they do, but not often. This is because to get to be in the same league as the Mclain Wards, Ian Millers, Denny Emersons and Nick Skeltons of the world, you have to be completely at mercy to this sport and all of its aspects. Rarely do you see top riders in these world class competitions that have no horsemanship skills whatsoever. To suggest this is just moronic; it just does not happen. Is it unfortunate that the road to the top is easier for people that come into the sport with money than those without it? Absolutely. Does that mean riders without a large financial substinance have to work three or four times as hard to get there? Absolutely. Does it also help if you have some natural skills and abilities going into the sport than if you do not? I think you get the picture. Any champions in our world do not become champions by paying their way. And the ones that do are never comparable to the ones that had to give their life, blood, sweat and tears to get there. A champion that earned it is much more admirable than one that paid for it.

I would also like to take a moment to remind everyone of another factor in this whole debacle, which is of course the horses. Sure, money in the bank can buy you a beautiful robot horse to win you all the ribbons in the world, no problem. But you do not need the robot horse to excel in this sport. You need skill, you need talent, you need hard work. When Ms. Prudent responds to Chris Staffords question of what happens when we run out of these robot horses and if that's even possible by saying that it "depends on how much money they have" is like a slap across the face to me. It is an aid in this sport to have money, not a requirement. We can take green horses and train them to have elite olympic potential. It is a comibination of the horse and the rider. If you can't train horses to have the potential to become preliminary but have the money to get there then maybe you don't belong at the top anyways. Nobody is stopping these talented, capable riders from saving $1000, going out and rescuing or buying a horse sitting out in a field somewhere and training it. If that horse doesn't have the potential to take you where you want to go, you sell it and buy another one. And you keep doing that until the right one comes along, in which case you will know immediately when it does. Katie Prudent and her colleagues will keep labelling us as spoiled and unmotivated if we continue to allow her to be right. We need to work harder, train better, stay focused and if you want it as bad as you say you do, then just do it.

In conclusion, I would like to offer my fellow amateurs and young riders a ray of hope in what seems to be a misguided outlook on the future of our sport and our competition. I would also like to offer a few suggestions of various solutions, something that unfortunately Ms. Katie Prudent failed to do in the midst of her outrageous and irrelevant rant. The future of our sport in show jumping and eventing is not bleak and dismal. We need to remember that money cannot buy you everything (though I mean, it does help). There are plenty of talented young riders that do the barn chores and put in the long days and do whatever it takes to participate in this sport. I am one of them, and all I can say to you is that it just takes longer for us to get there but that does not make it an impossible feat. So we need to prove Ms. Prudent wrong and put in those extra hours at work. Get a second job. Set up a garage sale. Do a fundraiser. Get a third job. I've done it... hell I am doing it right now. Buy young, green horses and train them, then sell them and buy some more horses. Work your way to the top. Save your money and buy a horse that can get you there. If you're good and you want it bad enough then you can get there. Opportunities come to those that are talented, dedicated and work hard. People will notice, I promise.

As for the Katie Prudents of the world, why not use your stance and political positions for something actually useful and talk to the higher ups about decreasing the cost of entries, to help out those amateurs that can't afford to show because of outrageous fees that only the rich can afford. S**t rolls downhill, so if we want improvements in the costs and degradations of our sport, it starts with people like you, Katie. Maybe we can find ways to change the aspect of our competition to seed out these 'talentless, lazy riders' that seem to trump our sport and begin to ask questions in these competitions that only horses and riders with real skills can answer. But nope, instead these people (like Ms. Prudent) are wasting everybody's time, and their own breath by sitting on their high horse (metaphorical and literal) complaining about how nobody is doing anything about this. We need to show her that we are not the victimised, pathetic and useless generation that she and many others believe us to be.

-A