One hover forward - two steps back

I assume then that I've produced photos so awe-inspiring that they've stunned all to silence

Nah ... I just don't have any experience shooting (hmmm ... "photographing") horses.
Of the two, I probably prefer the first simply because of the "moment" - four feet off the ground is a bit more dynamic for me.
Have you got a similar shot with the front feet extending forward? Would be interested to see if it makes for an even more dynamic image.
I like the rider's expression a lot more in the second photo - there is more intensity and emotion. (the female rider in #1 just looks as if she could be smiling over a cup of tea/coffee).
The second rider's stance is more intense also - leaning forward.
Hmmm ... maybe I'm liking #2 more than #1
One thing that just holds me back from going "WOW!" is the close crop at the back of both - I would like a little bit more room there. I would also love to see a shot like #2 but with the weight not going "down" ... just to see if it makes a difference.
Sports people often look better/graceful if their weight is moving up - unless you want to emphasise that moment of muscle contraction in the thighs and face.
Anyway, feel free to ignore as I am completely clueless on equine photography.
For all I know they both could be worth $1,000,000

I agree with the more space at the back of the horse for #1. #2 is a through away.
So you were at a 1 day or 3 day event? You couldn't find a more interesting location to shoot?

Alpha it was a 2 day event but I was only there for part of 1 day and with a few members of family. It was also a site I'd never been to before so it was, photographically, not the most ideal approach. Cross country too so a good chunk of time was walking the course (whilst it was running) and getting grabshots as I went, which these two were. I do wish I'd have had more time, less distractions and actually known the course somewhat better to pick a good spot.

From memory I was around 80mm or so with a fence between me and the horse; so a little tight and I do agree with both of you that the tails could have done with more space (I tend to find that I end up getting too fixated "in camera" on getting close and chopping or near chopping bits off around the edges).


Shot two is odd indeed, but more so I feel because the background came out how it did. I guess I got just the right angle and distance to get the busy background in a state not quite soft enough.

Shot two the more I look at it and compare the more I think the moment isn't quite there, I agree that the pose of the rider is nice and action filled, but the horses stride seems to be more a dead stop in the way the forebody is posed. I don't know, might be I'm attributing too much weight to that foreleg right out in front that looks very firm, stable and static in pose (whilst the back end is doing far more motion).

Also I forgot to post shot details:
Shot 1
f3.2, ISO 1600, 1/1250sec at 80mm

Shot 2
f3.2, ISO 1600 1/640sec at 80mm