I wouldn't expect someone with good eq to be able to train a green horse. Just because you can ride doesn't mean you can train. I think I agree with this statement.
At the local shows, we have a class called "Ride-A-Buck" where you sit on a dollar bill bareback. You start simple, walk, halt, back up. Then you move up to trotting, cantering, jumping, etc. Until the last dollar-sitter is left. It's great fun. =]
Not necessarily. Not all eq riders pose, and not all dressage riders can sit a buck or train a green horse. L think it has to do with the level of experience. The riders who can't sit a buck probably aren't the ones winning the classes :). L agree with the second half, though.
In my AREA - definite agree. I've ridden with enough of these girls to realize that it doesn't actually take ALL that much skill to ride a 3'0" course. The type of refusals that send them flying have me gaping in disbelief - if you can't ride an easy deek coming from half a mile away, get off the dang horse. I don't see why they need to know how to ride a bronc (most of us don't), but you DO need to be good enough to not break your neck everytime your horse trips or spooks. I haven't met a younger show rider in my area that can ride for a hill of beans, regardless of how much better her "equitation" is from mine.
I would sincerely HOPE that the girls winning at places like Maclays can ride better then that and aren't just posing on a pony.
Edit - As a good note, I find it hilarious how much we preach HEELS DOWN and yet in places like Europe the concept is virtually foreign to them and they ride 20x better then North Americans. The reason? Equitation doesn't EXIST in England - they don't HAVE "equitation" classes. Horse shows are about making the horse perform. They don't worry about "looking good", they worry about being functional enough to win a class, as it should be. People worrying about looking good are not riding, in my opinion.