On the Importance of Being a Good Punter

I want to continue the theme of instruction and training in this post, but this time with reference to equestrianism.

It's probably fair to say that the horse people of Middle England include individuals whose views, attitudes and behaviours are every bit as daft as some adherents of New Labour. Indeed, when I had a dispute with the owners of an upmarket livery yard a few years ago and recounted the names and other details of the persons involved to a Liberal Democrat friend, and former Labour local councillor, his response was something to the effect of : "This all sounds very New Labour to me".

I have been a horse rider for about forty years, and in that time I've probably ridden in excess of 100 horses. With one or two exceptions, these creatures have caused me very few difficulities and brought me great pleasure and "instruction". The same can not always be said of people who profess to be horsewomen and men , and who call themselves "trainers". There is a tendency to value appearance over substance in present day equitation. No doubt this tendency is ever present but I would suggest that it is stronger today than in the more recent past.

A few weeks ago, I was given a new insight into why this is so. I had just had what can only be described as an excellent jumping lesson. Believe me good jumping instruction for the amateur rider is hard to come by ! The instructor clearly identified my strengths and weaknesses to me, and gave a lesson which was at once challenging and enjoyable, for both rider and horse. Afterwards, he distinguished the "horseman" from the "competitor" : the latter being mainly concerned with "winning", and with finding a horse who can facilitate this; and the "horseman" being someone with a deep understanding of horses, the strengths, weaknesses and aptitudes of different animals, and the ability to get the best from each individual.

However, we live in a very competitive age (in some respects ridiculously so). The U S economist and management guru Michael Porter ("The Competitive Advantage of Nations", "On Competition" etc) has usefully distinguised healthy competition from "mutually destructive rivalry". Understanding the difference between these is very important in horse and other sports, as it is in business and management.

Some years ago, I had the benefit of riding with a talented woman (who was a very good competitor, but perhaps not such a good horsewoman). Nevertheless, from my perspective the relationship was beneficial. I noted some of her techniques, and her competitive spirit re-galvanised the competitive person in me. One outcome of this was that I helped organise 2 teams of horses and riders to attend a "British Riding Clubs" (think adult "Pony Club") competition at the Hickstead All England Show Jumping Ground. Unfortunately, some "mutually destructive rivalry" broke out amongst some potential team members. This made the organisers's job more difficult than anticipated, and our trainer's "values" didn't help matters.

The trainer in question made the mistake of valueing appearance over substance. He singled out the talented lady mentioned above who chose to ride a fine looking horse, the darling of many a lady rider, and quite a few gentleman. This "partnership" could do no wrong in the training sessions. Meanwhile, the horse I had chosen to ride, and particularly myself, could do very little right. Not since primary school had I been singled out for such admonishment. By the end of the sessions, I felt like dismounting and punching the trainer, who incidentally bore some resemblence to James Hewitt (when he was younger), but with a manner more like John Reid's.

Nevertheless, I still felt very much "fit for purpose", and I knew that my horse would be too on the day of the competition. This day duly arrived. The talented lady and her fine looking horse were amongst the first to enter the arena and were promptly eliminated at the second or third fence, after three refusals, causing the rider to have a major tantrum. This and the elimination had some negative impact on other people. However, with the exception of another rider whose pony (smaller than a horse) left the arena midway through the course (I shall come on to him later), everyone else "got round". Barring a small mistake, my round went very well and I thoroughly enjoyed myself, as did most other people who came as competitors and supporters.

The only real downside of the day was the major tantrum. I felt slightly bad about all this. The horse that had caused the outburst had a reputation for being somewhat capricious, not least in his tendency to buck people off, something that had happened on a previous occasion even to the talented lady in the middle of a show ring. "Handsome is as homesome does" as the saying goes, and, personally, I was surprised that she "stuck with him". My feeling was that the trainer had relied too much on his impressions "on the day", paying little regard to what other people told him of the horse's previous form, and re-inforcing the rider's tendency to be "over-confident".

With horses, as with many things in life, it is important to develop the skills of the a good punter. By this I mean, seek out professional advice but don't rely on it overmuch. Develop your own judgement based upon knowledge and experience. Be aware of your strengths and weaknesses. Above all, know when to take risks and when to go for a safe bet.

At the "Riding Clubs" competition I had gone for a horse I knew to be a "safe bet". However, on another occasion, I decided to "take a risk". I was a late entrant to something called "Top Score Jumping", meaning that the most difficult fences carry the most points and the winner has the "top score". The only horse available for me to ride was the pony I mentioned earlier. I should say that I am quite tall but not very heavy, and also that I am good at adjusting my riding to different types of horse, or pony. This time, the talented lady rode the "safe bet" horse. As it happened, she and I were joint second on this occasion.

I was therefore rather annoyed when the judge (a colleague of the trainer previously mentioned) disqualified me for being incorrectly attired. Although, as far as could make out the Show Rules did not specify "correct attire" beyond the requirements which I had fulfilled. However, I did not quarrel with the decision, for in my experience, the chance to give a "Harvey Smith" to this kind of "bureaucracy" always comes around.