Recreational vs Professional Eventing

[denny]

It strikes me that there are two fairly distinct eventing sports in the US.
There is a small (500 riders?) group of advanced, intermediate and preliminary (sometimes) riders, usually very goal oriented, very proficient, quite well mounted, reasonably or very well funded. I call this group "professional", not in the USEF definition, but in its approach to riding and competing.
Then there`s everyone else, maybe 20-25,000 riders from "grasshopper", "minnow", through beg. novice, novice, training, and (sometimes) into preliminary.
USUALLY, the bad problems happen with or to the first group, because it`s so much harder there, at those levels.
But although it`s critically important to try to fix the sport at the two-three higher levels, I don`t think it`s correct to say that there`s a crisis going on in recreational US eventing, where every weekend, at recognized and unrecognized events all across the country, riders who are equally passionate about this sport are chasing their own dreams.

[DLee]

I don't think I have any more fear of competing at my lower levels now than I have ever had (since the early 80's at my first one.)

I definitely have more fear now of going to WATCH an upper level event. So much of the joy has gone out of it for me.

[denny]

DLee, that`s my point. The sport that most of us actually ride in is in pretty good shape, I think. When we say that eventing is in crisis, what I think that really means is that the very top is in crisis, but that doesn`t mean that suddenly all of eventing has turned into some battlefield.
I guess what I`m groping at is "keep it in perspective."
For 90-95 % of the riders, eventing is just fine. (Except for land loss.)

[BarbB]

The 95% for whom the sport is just fine are not televised, watched by huge crowds of non-horse people or scrutinized by the NY Times.
I doubt that anyone outside of the horse community would care about the distinction between the two. What is going on at the upper levels DOES affect the rider making her debut at grasshopper level this weekend.

This is the second time in a few years that there has been an uproar over horse and rider deaths. This time it again seems to be winding down into nothing, but not before, this time, drawing the attention of the outside media.

Eventually there will be an uproar that will not be allowed to just go away and then the riders at the lower levels will pay the cost for the riders at the upper levels who keep insisting that there is nothing wrong.

As I posted on another thread, I have loved this sport for 30+ years, but only recently have I felt that I needed to defend it, and it is becoming a pretty weak defense.

[RunForIt]

The 95% for whom the sport is just fine are not televised, watched by huge crowds of non-horse people or scrutinized by the NY Times.
I doubt that anyone outside of the horse community would care about the distinction between the two. What is going on at the upper levels DOES affect the rider making her debut at grasshopper level this weekend.

This is the second time in a few years that there has been an uproar over horse and rider deaths. This time it again seems to be winding down into nothing, but not before, this time, drawing the attention of the outside media.

Eventually there will be an uproar that will not be allowed to just go away and then the riders at the lower levels will pay the cost for the riders at the upper levels who keep insisting that there is nothing wrong.

As I posted on another thread, I have loved this sport for 30+ years, but only recently have I felt that I needed to defend it, and it is becoming a pretty weak defense.

You've written what many of us think.

I've reread Danny Warrington's COTH article many times this weekend - had JUST finished reading it the first time when the initial post about Tigger Too dying at Jersey Fresh appeared...

Defend eventing? How?

The lower levels are doing fine - accidents do seem to be the rare circumstance from Training down to minnow...but we all are part of the same sport. I don't care about the media, I care about defending upper level eventing to MYSELF!

Here's how Danny ended his article:
"We don’t have to change the sport. We have to change way the sport is being played by the players."

[IFG]

Denny,

I agree. The trick is to fix the upper levels without killing the lower levels with unnecessary regulation.

[denny]

Does anyone think it`s possible to "fix" the upper levels if the upper level riders themselves won`t get fully involved in the process?
Correct me if I`m wrong (I know you will!), but I don`t see that happening yet.
All we hear these days is how eventing is broken, but I don`t think most of us broke it.
Those who broke it are the ones who need to fix it, at their levels. For everyone else, I like that old saying,
"If it ain`t broke, don`t fix it."
Sure, the lower levels are not exempt from bad riding or poor xc design, but the heights and spreads are easier, the speeds are slower, and the distances shorter, so the stakes are nowhere near so high.
Maybe it`s time for an official two sport model, to make official that which already exists.
The USEF to struggle with their broken part, the USEA to administer the ok lower levels?
Or something like that.

[longrun]

That sounds like a great idea to me, Denny.
The one thing that does bother me a little, still, though, is how technical the xc courses have gotten at the lower levels. I couldn't believe that there was a mini-coffin on a bending line at Stoneleigh last summer. And King Oak's Spring Training level course had 3 combinations (well, one was a related distance but to my green guy it didn't make a difference) in the first 10 fences, and 5 combinations on course total. None with a straight approach, no good galloping to develop a rhythm. I do think there has been a trickle down of technicality that is shaking horses' confidence.
I have two girls - 7 and 8 - and don't know when they'll be able to run cross country at a recognized event. You used to be able to tell your kids to look up and kick and they could get the job done. Now it's balance, collect, gallop, collect, turn, jump... At BN!! Learning how to run and jump cross country happened at events in the old days, too. It wasn't too hard at the lower levels. You learned how to jump single fences and go out and have fun without too much thinking. Somehow we have lost that.

[pwynnnorman]

I think "recreational eventing" and "professional eventing" are an excellent terms to introduce into the discussions, both inside and beyond the sport.

I believe in the potential power of words, which is why I think Denny's terms point to a critical distinction that it would be much to the sport's advantage to use and use frequently in discussing the challenges being faced.

[Kanga]

Can someone out there come up with a list over the last 3 years of major accidents that have happened to horse/rider in the 2 different categories that we are talking about? It does seem to be that most major accidents are happening in the upper levels. Is that just because what most of us hear about are the upper level riders and events?

If that data turns out to be crystal clear that our 5% of riders are the ones having the "MAJOR" trouble then can't the other 95% of the riders MAKE THE CHANGES and have them inforced by the USEA? We do live in a DEMOCRACY, last I checked here in America.

I'm sure many of us here will be going to the safety summit. It would be nice to talk about this exact topic there.

[SmallHerd]

It's kind of like business - 80% of your revenue comes from 20% of your customers.

I think what is happening at the UL WILL have an impact on the LL because the outside person does not know the difference. While the UL events in the past few months do not have an immediate impact on my baby novice outing at the end of this month, it will eventually. Even people at work have come up to me based on what they read in the NYT.

I certainly don't even consider my horse and I having a rotational fall or a fatal heart attack on course. We just aren't going fast enough or working hard enough to increase those chances at this level. My concerns of the day are not to have any run-outs on my green bean and to remember the stadium course. But that doesn't stop my family or friends from thinking I am absolutely crazy.

Most of us can and do keep it in perspective, but a non-horse person or non-equestrian reporter will not.

So I then ask, how do we maintain our eventing 'family' if you will (keeping it all the same sport), while managing the PR so that not ALL eventing is seen in the same light? Or maybe we don't.

Or maybe the USEA can categorize the levels as professional and recreational?

I don't have the answers, but certainly understand and agree with Denny's post. Loss of land use and gas prices seem to be the biggest problem for the lower levels right now.

[SmallHerd]

Does anyone think it`s possible to "fix" the upper levels if the upper level riders themselves won`t get fully involved in the process?
Correct me if I`m wrong (I know you will!), but I don`t see that happening yet.
All we hear these days is how eventing is broken, but I don`t think most of us broke it.
Those who broke it are the ones who need to fix it, at their levels. For everyone else, I like that old saying,
"If it ain`t broke, don`t fix it."
Sure, the lower levels are not exempt from bad riding or poor xc design, but the heights and spreads are easier, the speeds are slower, and the distances shorter, so the stakes are nowhere near so high.
Maybe it`s time for an official two sport model, to make official that which already exists.
The USEF to struggle with their broken part, the USEA to administer the ok lower levels?
Or something like that.

And yes, I totally agree. Only the ULR's can fix the ULs. We can suggest, discuss, speculate and even pontificate all day long, but unless the ULRs get on the 'change' bandwagon, it ain't gonna happen. Right now the governing bodies are managing the PR, but to affect change, the ULRs have to speak up, get involved and MAKE it happen.

Honestly, I am a bit shocked that I haven't read or heard of any current BNRs commenting at all. Why are they silent?

[blackwly]

I'd go even farther. I think we've heard from the ULR's who are (technically or essentially) amateurs, and we've heard from a few of the really famous old school ULR's who have nothing else to prove (Denny, Bruce Davidson, loved his commentary.) We've also heard from a few riders who don't actually ride for our country (Leslie Law.) The common denominator - everyone who I hear speaking out is not in the thick of the upper level political scheme of US eventing. Yet many if not most of the tragedies we're seeing involve riders who are in the thick of it, or are hoping to be there within the next few years. If THESE people don't start telling us what they think and how they want to fix things, I don't really think we're getting anywhere.

I would love to read published interviews on this subject by everyone on this summer's short list. And then I'd like to see if those riders can back up what they have to say with their own personal riding choices.

[enjoytheride]

So do people eventing at the weanie levels have no right to talk about eventing tragedies at the upper levels? Is your voice not worthwhile unless you've ridden at the level the accidents are happening?

A friend and I were discussing the controversial subject of abortions. I was told that I have no right saying anything about the subject at all because I never had children and would never "understand" and my point was not valid. However, if I had children I would automtically be against it because that is what having children does.

Are the accidents like this? Can you not critique if you have not been there? Then once you're there it's just "part of the sport" Is the opinion of anyone who will always ride below a particular level not valid?

In a thread I started it seems like there is a "it can't happen to me" theme running. So it can't be talked about by lower level weanies, and nobody at the upper levels is concerned because they're different and it can't happen to them. So there we are in exactly the same spot.

If there are only a few people who think that the issue effects them then nothing is done about the issue, and it seems like it might not be significant enough to change people's minds about it.

[eventer_mi]

Denny, I am so glad to see you, a former "professional level" rider/trainer (by your current definition of the sport), current BNT, and now advocate for the Recreational Tadpoles and Others amongst us, having the honesty and the guts to make this post. It has been something that I have been worrying over, like a dog with a bone, over the past few months, but not daring to say anything to anybody for fear of an uproar. Sure, the courses are becoming more technical at the lower levels - that trickle-down effect - but we are not in danger of our lives or our horse's lives due to the decreased speeds, heights, etc of our courses. When I watched the telecast of Rolex, it struck me again and again how different that sport is than the one that I just completed three weeks ago at The Horse Park in NC - it is, in comparison, not unlike my husband (Cat 2 Racer) racing the Tour De Moore (50 miles) compared to the racers in the Tour de France (Elite level racers).

I'm not sure what I'm trying to say, here, except that I agree with you that the only way to fix that small upper level percentage of the sport is to start with the people themselves who compete at that level. The problem with someone like me commenting on changes to the sport is that someone like me can't be taken too seriously, because my perception of what encompasses a "dangerous" jump really depends on the horse that I happen to be mounted on - right now, a strange looking crossrail seems frightening to me, mounted on my baby. There is a lack of proper perspective there.

The question I have is that if we make a two-sport model, where is that gap going to be and how will/can that gap be bridged? Darren was injured at Prelim, the level that most of us consider to be the "bridge" between the upper levels and the lower levels. And, if we do recognize that there is a gap and that there really are two different sports, will that affect the people who make that crossover and how will it affect them - dramatic changes in entry fees to fund the differently designed jumps, "pro" team status (pro teams in the Tour de France, or invitational only), qualification points or levels? The problem with stricter qualifications is that you make the assumption that we are allowing lesser-qualified riders/horses to compete, which is making the assumption that they weren't qualified for that level, which may or not be the case. At what point do we need to tell people to assume the responsibility for the risk of the sport, and at what point do WE, as competitors and course designers and trainers and supporters and sponsors need to assume that responsibility?

It makes me sick to hear of another loss, but it doesn't make me love the sport and the heart of the people and horses who compete in the sport any less, regardless of whether you're the Queen of Tadpoles or the Queen and King of Eventing (the O'Connors). I don't have the answers, nor will I, but I applaud you, Denny, for voicing what I, and probably a lot of other people on this board, have been thinking all along.

[eventer_mi]

While the UL events in the past few months do not have an immediate impact on my baby novice outing at the end of this month, it will eventually. Even people at work have come up to me based on what they read in the NYT.

They certainly still talk about it when they are reminded that it's the sport that Christopher Reeve was injured doing.

However, the public's attention span is a very short one. What gets them in an uproar now will most likely be forgotten in a few short months, as another tragedy hits the headlines and distracts our current short attention span. 9-11 is pretty much forgotten as a distant memory - just ask my 9th graders in class, who were half their age now when it happened. I'm not saying that we shoudn't be trying to "fix" our sport - I'm saying not to worry unduly about the public's opinion of our sport, as it will most likely pass with time. Changing the public view and perception of eventing isn't going to give us more, inexpensive land to event on, or give us more dollars to make it more affordable for all of us, or change the fact that horse sports, the ones requirning English saddles in general, are seen as an Elite sport where only the rich can participate. Public view of horses and horse sports needs to be changed at the grass levels, and attempting to change the public viewpoint of eventing will do very little towards that goal.

Please don't misunderstand - there is something seriously wrong with the upper levels, and most heavily publicized and televised, of our sport. I'd be interested to hear what the Brits and the Irish and the Aussies and the Kiwis and the Germans and everybody else across the pond think of their sport, as horses are more of a part of their culture, and if it's changed the public view of eventing over there as well.

[poltroon]

If I remember correctly, the level with the greatest number of fatalities is actually Preliminary/UK Novice, which is sort of where the two halves meet.

[snoopy]

If I remember correctly, the level with the greatest number of fatalities is actually Preliminary/UK Novice, which is sort of where the two halves meet.


and where I believe that those driven individuals push their horses to that level in order to feel "validated" and seperated from the "recreational" eventer. There seems to be some sort of cache' to say that "I ride at the prelim level".

[RunForIt]

Here's "my" reality of the LLRs impact on the ULRs - we are asking them to come out publicly, take a stand, explain how they make decisions regarding the welfare of their horses vs. their personal ambitions, and be prepared to answer questions. Am I somewhere in the vicinity of what we'd like to see them do?

Well, we LLRs need to be as gutsy as we expect the big time folks to be...we finance a great deal of their sport, even if we don't buy the horses and pay the entry fees. How many of us go to clinics, take lessons, etc., etc., etc., from ULRs. Got guts, want change for horses at the ULs? Go to them, ask their opinions, DON'T report it here, - but damnit - act.

Same for USEA. I'm going to ask them to let me know the names of the committees, the mission of each committee, the names of the committee members, and I am going to write each committee a letter asking for their plans, their schedule for reporting ideas/results/decisions to the general membership.

I can't defend UL eventing to myself today - its all one sport.

[wanderlust]

Does anyone think it`s possible to "fix" the upper levels if the upper level riders themselves won`t get fully involved in the process?

There is a very true saying that "perception is reality". It seems that those who ride at the "elite" level of eventing have a very different perception of current issues than those who do not. Honestly, those who do not probably have a clearer, less clouded picture of what is truly going on, as they have the benefit of distance with which to observe the goings-on.

So, the question becomes: How do you shift the perception of those who are still of the "freak accident" or "inexperienced at this level" mindset to the mindset that a dead horse or two and critically injured riders at every major CIC is *not* a string of freak accidents, is *not* limited to only inexperienced riders or horses, and just in general, is *not* acceptable? Not to mention, that it could happen to them next and they are NOT invincible?

[denny]

I have a sense that there is a leadership vacuum among the current ULRs.
Make a list of those willing to say ANYTHING, either pro or con.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
?
?
Is there life on that planet? Anywhere? Anybody?

[poltroon]

and where I believe that those driven individuals push their horses to that level in order to feel "validated" and seperated from the "recreational" eventer. There seems to be some sort of cache' to say that "I ride at the prelim level".

Well, prelim is where you be come "real" ;), for sure. It's the first FEI level, so there's that cachet. You have to have ridden at prelim in order to become a TD. I think you've exactly nailed it.

Further, I remember a lovely lady in my area many years back, who used to win Training level nearly every time out. There was a fair amount of pressure on her from other people that she should move up - they were sick of losing to her - but she wisely said that she knew her limits, and that she wasn't going to ask her lovely horse to pack her around at prelim.

[poltroon]

I have a sense that there is a leadership vacuum among the current ULRs.
Make a list of those willing to say ANYTHING, either pro or con.


Does it not occur to them that if the smurfs are afraid to watch them compete because we're afraid someone will die in front of us, that we won't buy them horses and we won't send sponsorship money and we won't send our kids to train for eventing?

[RunForIt]

Does it not occur to them that if the smurfs are afraid to watch them compete because we're afraid someone will die in front of us, that we won't buy them horses and we won't send sponsorship money and we won't send our kids to train for eventing?



I don't think that they have any reason to believe that will happen any more than they believe that they will be hurt or their horses will die...it hasn't happened.

[flyingchange]

Yeah, the prevailing theme amongst the ULRs seems to be "I Know Nothing!" and "Ignorance is Bliss"! "Oh, so sad about such and such last weekend ... I wonder if my WS has printed out all my times for this weekend?"

[eventmom]

Read this thread (and many related threads) with enthusiasm. I am not really sure how to put my feelings into words, but will give it a try.
I just wanted to suggest that where the UL and LL meet is at least partially in the hearts of us mothers!
My daughters are quite young. They are both heading the eventing direction. I can imagine that if things keep going the way they are, they will both be UL eventing before I know it! I have been VERY concerned watching all that has happened. I often wonder, if I am making a mistake exposing my kids to this sport.
Recently, reading the threads on personal responsibility has lightened my heart a bit. I am really taking that to heart. My girls won't be moving up the levels before they are BORED at the current one. There is really no hurry, and there is so much to learn at each level.
We did an event last weekend. And I had the opportunity to watch some of the other eventers out there. Honestly, I was very surprised by what I saw. Lots of bad riding, and lots of kids who didn't know how to ride, but were riding babysitter horses. I am not sure if this is common. And I don't know if these are riders who are just getting that one opportunity, as opposed to kids who are in it for moving forward. I also only got to watch the b/n level, and don't know if it is the same up the levels.
But, I did say to myself, that if this is the standard for riding, no wonder people and their horses are getting hurt.
Am I missing something here?
Anyway, just wanted to point out that where us moms are concerned, all the levels are part of the same sport. Its all part of the same direction our kids are heading.

[ss3777]

I agree that there certainly exists a division between the “recreational and professional” riders. I wonder what a official separation would achieve? I assume that the main impetus to make a change is to somehow influence the carnage at the ULs. I am not sure this would happen. I would imagine that the ULRs would say, finally no more back talk from the peanut gallery. If the horse and rider deaths continue, what have we achieved? Would we simply be pulling a “Pontius Pilate”?

I agree (and have done this) with Runforit:

"Well, we LLRs need to be as gutsy as we expect the big time folks to be...we finance a great deal of their sport, even if we don't buy the horses and pay the entry fees. How many of us go to clinics, take lessons, etc., etc., etc., from ULRs. Got guts, want change for horses at the ULs? Go to them, ask their opinions, DON'T report it here, - but damnit - act.

[lbgreen]

and where I believe that those driven individuals push their horses to that level in order to feel "validated" and seperated from the "recreational" eventer. There seems to be some sort of cache' to say that "I ride at the prelim level".

I'm a recreational rider riding at training and preliminary. I don't ride at prelim to be validated and "separated from the recreational rider" group. I do it because I believe that my horse and I are ready to do it. Sometimes. At some courses. I pick and choose carefully. I'm also happy to ride a training course when it's listed as a "challenging course." I suspect that there are a lot of "recreational eventers" riding at the prelim level who are like me. I call myself a "training/prelim" rider and, yes, I am proud of it. But I'm neither pushing myself nor my horse to do it, we are both having fun and that is what this sport is supposed to be about...

[TB or not TB?]

Does anyone think it`s possible to "fix" the upper levels if the upper level riders themselves won`t get fully involved in the process?
Correct me if I`m wrong (I know you will!), but I don`t see that happening yet.

Actually Denny, I think that change is happening whether the ULR's like it or not. If they were smart, they WOULD be involved, and could shape the sport to fit their needs while still satisfying the demands of the smurfs.

Let's be honest, the smurfs hold the purse strings and are the majority members, and they are speaking out. Even if the ULRs honestly believe nothing is wrong, tough luck, the crowd has spoken.

However since they don't seem to be interested or willing, we will pick and choose for them.

[DizzyMagic]

I don't think you can really separate the two, not completely. People who are recreational competitors are also often spectators for the professionals. And it's just a gut-punch to see catastrophic falls, to watch a horse die, to watch riders get loaded into helicopters. Worrying and praying that the horses and riders will make it through the event alive just takes the shine off the whole sport for me. If it weren't for the fact that there seems to be some momentum to address these issues, I'm pretty sure I would just go away and stay away...

Emily

[Picasso]

We do need to hear from the UL riders, but who wants to ostracize themselves in such a small group when sometimes the real answer is bad riding? There would be, I am sure, a feeling of 'haven't they been punished enough and now we are going to point our finger and say its your fault this happened'. I would also hazard a guess that sponsorship would be tied into this. If someone says something controversial and the whole gang jumps on them for it, what does that do for their reputation? Or what about saying something that upsets the political powers that be? I have no facts to back that up, its simply a guess on my part based on life experience.

That being said, recreational riders ought to play a role in fixing this even if they NEVER ride at the level we are speaking about. Sometimes those not so close to it CAN see the issues better than the ones right there, its not so personal for us. For example, I can point out bad riding and exactly what is going bad, but ask me to execute on my own horse? Not so much. The brain says it, the body listening is another story. Like Riyad says to me (often), "You ride well standing next to me" when I am pointing out flaws. Part of it is a joke, part of it is "you know what you say, grasshopper, now do something with it when you are in the saddle".

[mbarrett]

I made a comment a couple of months back after Darren got hurt about making BN a "recreational" division. How interesting we see the term "recreational" division come up again.

I think there should be two tracks for eventing, one for us (LLR, who just want to have fun, no weird combinations or technical fences, and want to be challenged by the fact we're eventing) and for them (the ULR who want to move up, train horses that go to the top and aim for a place on the Team.)

Actually, I got flamed big time by other posters for actually suggesting that BN be ONLY for ammy's and not allow pros of any way, shape, or form from entering this division. IMO pros. can run their horses in Novice and up.

Now the term "recreational" is being suggested again and it's not a bad word.

[ezmissg]

I have a sense that there is a leadership vacuum among the current ULRs.
Make a list of those willing to say ANYTHING, either pro or con.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
?
?
Is there life on that planet? Anywhere? Anybody?


Thank you, thank you, thank you, Denny!

Their silence is DEAFENING.

I'm going to Lexington, and I'm most curious to see who shows up and, futher, if they have anything substantive to say.

I'm astounded by these people having the cojones to ride at the advanced levels, but lacking the same to address a very serious, and now public, issue which actually could have the MOST DIRECT IMPACT ON THEM.

But, then, I've never been known for the ability to keep my mouth shut or not speak very directly to an issue. :eek::yes:

[TB or not TB?]

Bruce, Corrinne, Leslie Law, and CMP all wrote letters that were posted on the USEA website. Phillip Dutton posted on his blog.

Not a lot of response but some. Still, the silence really is deafening. :no:

[Kementari]

I made a comment a couple of months back after Darren got hurt about making BN a "recreational" division. How interesting we see the term "recreational" division come up again.

I think there should be two tracks for eventing, one for us (LLR, who just want to have fun, no weird combinations or technical fences, and want to be challenged by the fact we're eventing) and for them (the ULR who want to move up, train horses that go to the top and aim for a place on the Team.)

Actually, I got flamed big time by other posters for actually suggesting that BN be ONLY for ammy's and not allow pros of any way, shape, or form from entering this division. IMO pros. can run their horses in Novice and up.

Now the term "recreational" is being suggested again and it's not a bad word.

Only if you redefine pro...

I'm a pro under USEF rules. I work green horses; I occasionally give "clinics" for kids who are just starting to show (geared to little local shows, just so they know what to expect). But, um, I'm no Darren. ;) I like my BN. And there are LOTS of people like me out there. :yes:

Plus, honestly, what does it achieve to tell pros they can't ride BN? It's easier to get a ribbon? Really...it doesn't make it any safer - even ammies want their courses to be good enough to prepare them for the next level(s). And one thing I really like about eventing is that we all show against each other, and it's just down to who puts in the best ride on that day. I may like my BN, but I don't want to be handed my ribbon on a platter; there's no thrill in that.

I like what Denny is saying, but I think maybe we need to not use the term "professional," because it already has a definition that ISN'T necessarily what is meant in this distinction. Several people have used "elite" - I think that works better in this context. We have "recreational" riders, who may make a little money riding or instructing on the side, and then we have the "elite" riders, who may not be actually making money from horses at all. :yes:

[LisaB]

Is it because when you make a mistake in the UL, you die? And if you make that mistake at a LL, you may just fall? Is it because if I had a fall at TR, no one is going to post it?
I think the noise level is coming from us seeing what's happening at the top and there is a trickle down effect.
Yes, I do see far greater level of riding at the LL than I ever have before.
I think what we're seeing in all the levels is the technical, non-cross-country testing courses. AND we are losing our horsemen. Badminton had riders gauge their mounts and judge accordingly (in most cases). We did't have that in many cases over the spring season. These pros (young and old, in prelim and above) are so hell bent on winning and moving up. Danny was right on.

[Gnep]

1. it is an Olympic year, nobody who has a chance to go to HK will say what they think, realy think, horse owners, coaches, trainers and riders.

2. the structure of the regulating boddies is so interwoven with private interests, that it is paralized, power brokers, chair warmers and money

3. the people that advice the powers to be, are the same BNs and ULs as in 1

4. the groopy mentality of their supporters, they are BNs they know what they are doing, they walk on water ( see Darren ) reinforces them.

5. business is good, more rides more big shows to go in a year, any changes or regulations at the top will possible change that

6. because of 5 the finger is pointed at the LLs

7. Leadership structure, you lead from the top, but if the top does not lead and blames the bottom 7/8 of the pyramid for the failures of the 1/8 top of the pyramid, than they are trieing to balance the pyramid on its tip

Pretty much a broken system

[SmallHerd]

Well I don't see the correlation between UL accidents and LL riders. How can the UL possibly blame the LL? That seems totally absurd.

I can see how no one would want to publicly state that any of the recent tragedies are based on rider error, particularly when the rider is in the hospital or struggling with their recovery. I mean, no one wants to finger point when someone is having surgery, suffered brain damage, or is fighting for their life. BUT, to not say anything because it is an Olympic year and if you say the wrong thing you might not be selected? That's just chicken-s*%t, in my opinion. And yeah, it is really broken.

[flutie1]

Well I don't see the correlation between UL accidents and LL riders. How can the UL possibly blame the LL? That seems totally absurd.

I can see how no one would want to publicly state that any of the recent tragedies are based on rider error, particularly when the rider is in the hospital or struggling with their recovery. I mean, no one wants to finger point when someone is having surgery, suffered brain damage, or is fighting for their life. BUT, to not say anything because it is an Olympic year and if you say the wrong thing you might not be selected? That's just chicken-s*%t, in my opinion. And yeah, it is really broken.

Just for the sake of argument, when a plane goes down, blame falls on the pilot's shoulders no matter what the outcome.

[LexInVA]

I look at it this way...you have a business system (brought over from the H/J world) where most of the best riders and horses are the equivalent of show dogs to their financial backers (many of whom occupy positions in the USET/USEF/USEA) who supply the horses and keep the riders comfortable with whatever their basic needs are. Those riders aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them or rock the boat. By the same token, many of those riders are not going to ask themselves those hard questions because if they do start asking them, in a public manner, their food dish is gonna get a lot smaller. In today's equestrian world, skill only gets you half of the way to the top. Money gets you the rest. If you want leadership, look elsewhere. You won't get it from the kennel.

[VicarageVee]

I have a sense that there is a leadership vacuum among the current ULRs.
Make a list of those willing to say ANYTHING, either pro or con.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
?
?
Is there life on that planet? Anywhere? Anybody?


Ok, I'm starting to get annoyed.

Just because they don't print it, doesn't mean they're not saying it at home to their friends and clients. THEY ARE. Moreover, assuming a "leadership" role is difficult for many younger ULRs, not only for political reasons, but also due to the time constraints they face--they have to teach, compete, live their lives, etc. GIVE THEM A BREAK.

Secondly, I may be a lone voice here, but I am getting increasingly concerned about the way conversations about "saving eventing" are going. THE LAST THING I WANT IS AN OVER-REGULATED SPORT, THAT WIDENS THE GULF BETWEEN PROFESSIONALS AND AMATEURS.

Here's my new policy for eveting: Do what YOU can. Stop asking why others aren't doing ENOUGH. And please find a new sport if you can only be negative about the state and the future of our shared passion.

[LLDM]

Go right ahead and be annoyed then. If they are "too busy" to be involved then they will just have to live with what the rest of us come up with to fix it.

I will agree with one thing - over regulating won't work. Draconian penaties might though. And that's where it is coming to. I don't have a problem with it. If your young ULRs do, then they best propose some of their own solutions.

SCFarm

Ok, I'm starting to get annoyed.

Just because they don't print it, doesn't mean they're not saying it at home to their friends and clients. THEY ARE. Moreover, assuming a "leadership" role is difficult for many younger ULRs, not only for political reasons, but also due to the time constraints they face--they have to teach, compete, live their lives, etc. GIVE THEM A BREAK.

Secondly, I may be a lone voice here, but I am getting increasingly concerned about the way conversations about "saving eventing" are going. THE LAST THING I WANT IS AN OVER-REGULATED SPORT, THAT WIDENS THE GULF BETWEEN PROFESSIONALS AND AMATEURS.

Here's my new policy for eveting: Do what YOU can. Stop asking why others aren't doing ENOUGH. And please find a new sport if you can only be negative about the state and the future of our shared passion.

[Fence2Fence]

There comes a point where saying "I'm not the problem. I'm doing what I can" just isn't enough.

I never thought I'd see the day when I wanted to quit the sport, even for being a LLR where there are minimal risks to me and my horse, I'm pretty close to it. I'm hanging on because I feel like there are changes coming to the sport.

What is happening in upper level eventing is unacceptable. Forget the fact that it's based on a multitude of factors. It's UNACCEPTABLE.

By staying with the sport, I feel it's giving tacit approval of the current state of eventing.
I don't want to financially support UL eventing anymore.

If that means there are two governing bodies, USEA for the LL and USEF for the UL, well...then so be it.

[SmallHerd]

Vic, I hear what you are saying, but so many of the LLRs look up to and admire the ULRs. Many of us have followed their careers and respect their opinions. While most of us are scrambling to get our brain around what has been happening, most of the current ULRs have been silent. It's a little disheartening.

I think it is important for the ULRs to give back to the sport. So many of them do via clinics, XC course walks, etc. It encourages the LLRs and helps keep the sport going forward, but it also helps their pocket books and pleases the sponsors. I think when someone has the priviledge of riding at that level, there is a certain amount of responsibility that goes with it. And part of that responsibility, IMO, is staying connected with the grass roots and core of the sport.

I'm not trying to be negative, and if my posts come off that way, I apologize.

[LLDM]

DLee, that`s my point. The sport that most of us actually ride in is in pretty good shape, I think. When we say that eventing is in crisis, what I think that really means is that the very top is in crisis, but that doesn`t mean that suddenly all of eventing has turned into some battlefield.
I guess what I`m groping at is "keep it in perspective."
For 90-95 % of the riders, eventing is just fine. (Except for land loss.)

I disagree - there are plenty of problems in lower level eventing. And in large part, I think those problems travel right on up to the upper levels as people progress. They just aren't fatal at the lower levels. Doesn't mean it's all peachy - if fact, I think it is a self perpetuating cycle.

Where in the world people got the idea that moving up had some type of formula or check list beats the he!! out of me. Every time I see a "should I move up?" thread, I just want to say "NO!". Because if you have to ask, either you aren't ready or you don't have the right people around you to help you make a great descision based on you, your horse and everything around you that matters. That doesn't seem to change at the upper levels. Horse and rider teams seem to be going beyond their limits regularly and to the worst possible outcomes. Fewer and fewer seem to know when to retire or to step back. That ethic used to start at the lower levels. Where did it go?

With all due respect to Norman Vincent Peale, The Power of Positive Thinking is no substitute for proper preparation and squarely facing one's own and one's horse's current and/or general limitations. No one has the "right" to event at any level - let alone the upper levels.

SCFarm

[Kementari]

Go right ahead and be annoyed then. If they are "too busy" to be involved then they will just have to live with what the rest of us come up with to fix it.

I will agree with one thing - over regulating won't work. Draconian penaties might though. And that's where it is coming to. I don't have a problem with it. If your young ULRs do, then they best propose some of their own solutions.

SCFarm

Precisely.

If they don't want to be involved in solving the problems (and speaking only to one's own clients in private is NOT being involved - it's protecting one's business interests), then they had darn well better be prepared to happily accept whatever solutions the rest of us come up with.

[fourhorses]

For what it's worth:

I would find it infinitely preferrable to not have a split between the upper and lower levels. It would be much better if some sort of fixing of this very broken system -- which many postings on this thread have hit the nail on -- could find some way to reach a common ground and interest, and fix itself. We, smurf, pro, and all those inbetween, would be so much the better off for it. So too, I believe, would be all of the horses, from UL to smurf packer -- who have the hardest lot and the least say in the matter; we owe them something more than feeding them well out of this -- like perhaps a fair shake for being our partners (and what is happening now to some of them...well, it's hardly the small gratitude for faithful service is it?).

However, if splitting the two worlds is what it takes, then perhaps it's for the best. Because this I do know:
-- that I really don't want to see some organization like PETA (which is already pointing a barrel at any and all horse sports, and does have considerable pull within HSUS, which has considerable political pull, et. al) going on a PR rampage and getting ALL eventing shut down; and don't anyone say it can't happen -- a lot of horsepeople said they couldn't get horse slaughter stopped either; it took awhile but what has happened? Every accident (and there are no such things as accidents, according to my old physics teacher -- just occurances that we did not intend nor foresee or decided to ignore), every transgression, every foot in mouth misquote builds a case, and...
--leads me to my second "annoyance"; I am tired of seeing yet one more thing that makes the horse world more divisive. This is a time when all horse people (at least all caring, ethical ones who give a damn about horses and keeping them) should be joining together and helping each other work out their problems, not throw monkey turds at each other from opposing trees. Times are getting hard, horses are seen as a luxury now more than ever, we'd better start all getting along or divided we will fall (at least the vast majority will) -- and what happens to the majority's horses then?


And even though the two worlds of eventing seem so far apart, they are more closely tied than people think. Lower level riders (especially young ones) emulate ULRs -- sometimes not a good emulation either: when I was young I was constantly exorted by event trainers/riders to: be sportsmanlike; be professional; be conservative; be fair, and this was what I admired so much that I wanted my kids in it as well as me going back to giving it a try -- now we see this "macho", extreme sport mentality out of a fair few, we have videos proclaiming that this [eventing] is what the person does, and proceeds to show somw bad wrecks and stating how dangerous it all is -- it is no wonder I have non-horse and horsey non-eventing friends freaking out about my family's very LL very recreational eventing, even to the point of questioning loaning a pony for my 9 yo. to learn to ride on -- they actually stated they were afraid he'd break down over jumps we put him to.
All they see is UL, all they see are the falls:(

[hrg]

I assure you that there is much discussion among ULRs about all aspects of safety, rules & regulations, and how to take part in the evolution of our sport. Do not mistake a lack of activity on the internet with lack of interest in what is going on.

[sharri13]

Denny - Per your opening post - Isn't that how it's always been?

[Janet]

Same for USEA. I'm going to ask them to let me know the names of the committees, the mission of each committee, the names of the committee members, and I am going to write each committee a letter asking for their plans, their schedule for reporting ideas/results/decisions to the general membership. Don't need to "ask them". It is right there on the web site.
http://www.useventing.com/resources/files/docs/2008_USEA_BOG_committee_diretory.pdf

[LisaB]

The ULR's are speaking out. But directly to whomever is working for the USEA in some capacity while at a show. Otherwise, they aren't on the internet avoiding work like the rest of us.
I know my instructor is voicing her concerns. Not to us, but to folks at the USEA whenever she gets a chance.
They are speaking up, just not in this format.
There has been feedback to Kevin and the like from the ULR's. They aren't making proposals on a whim or just by us, they are also speaking directly to the ULR's that are out there on the front lines getting injured.

[colliemom]

While I understand the basic philosophy and premise of the two-track suggestion, I hate the term "recreational" to define those who are not working toward being professionals, or making a team of some kind. "Recreational" implies that we are not serious about what we do, that we are just out on the weekends for a lark, like someone on vacation who rents a horse and rides on the beach. I know I (and all of my friends who pursue this sport) approach it very seriously, spend a lot of hard earned money on training and lessons, and clinics, and work very hard to get as good as we can be at our chosen leve. LisaB, you and I batted this around a few months ago!

Semantics, perhaps, but with so much of the rule proposals coming down seemingly aimed at the lower level (read: unprepared, poorly trained, etc.) eventers, the term "recreational" just adds fuel that that fire, and further increases the patronizing attitude many ULR's have toward LLR's. IMO.

[SPLAT]

My trainer ran Rolex this year and when she got back, I talked with her about the UL disasters of late. Her take was very much personal responsibility and knowing which shows to go to - when to call it a day - and never going in unprepared. She is very conservative with her students and horses and we go in to our shows prepared - not always to win, but with the skills to survive the levels we are at and most of the time her students are in the ribbons.

I think trainers are speaking out within their circle of influence and to their students. unfortunately, politics are a fact of life in any career, and people will not publicly bite the hand that feeds them. I know I won't in my career.

She takes it seriously - I think a big split in recreational/professional is not helpful - those of us who finance the ULs want to see them at the shows with us - its fun and increasing the split/training methods/x-country techniques is not a good solution - I hope this this safety summit is productive!

I think Denny's proposal is a bit draconian but perhaps these are times that need those measures - I however, hope there is another way.

[asterix]

The response here to Denny's ideas is illuminating. Big diversity of opinion, even for fractious us :winkgrin: -- what this tells me is that this is a PROBLEM but we don't really know how it is intersecting with the issue of injuries/deaths that is so rightly consuming us at the moment. Is it trickle up? Is it trickle down? Should the ULRs be speaking out to the LLRs? What are their responsibilities to the "rest" of the sport (smurfs, recreational, etc.)?

I think this needs to be part of any serious discussion of the sport -- we have to get a handle on it in order to move forward.

It's of keen interest to me as a LLR newly moved up to prelim -- I am very aware of being on that boundary...not the boundary between recreational and professional, per se, but the boundary between "making a mistake is expected and usually ok" and "this stuff is serious and you had better be on your game, asking your horse to save your a** is foolish and unfair"

It has really complicated my own relationship to the sport. I get such a thrill when I compete successfully, but I am so anxious that I might overface my (very capable and prepared) horse...

Sort of side note -- at my husband's request, I have started wearing my vest in SJ, even when it is not a one day event. It is legal, and, er, hot, to wear it over your jacket. I couldn't really argue when he asked me:
a) would you be safer if you fell with it on vs. not on?
and
b) do you think it's important to set an example to younger/less experienced riders that safety is always your first priority?

But, I am sad to report, not only was I THE ONLY ONE at prelim in a vest last weekend, I got a LOT of snarky looks from some fellow competitors in warm up. I have also gotten snarky comments in the past for wearing shoulder pads with my vest -- it is apparently not macho to do this. :rolleyes:

I think that attitude, at any level, has got to go.

[RunForIt]

I assure you that there is much discussion among ULRs about all aspects of safety, rules & regulations, and how to take part in the evolution of our sport. Do not mistake a lack of activity on the internet with lack of interest in what is going on.

I doubt there are many people on this BB who expect ULRs to post their thoughts on ths BB. BUT, can you point me towards the print publications where they are taking a stand so that we LLRs and ULRs KNOW their VALUES - let me repeat that last word because it matters to me: VALUES. It matters to me if the ULRs consider the animals they ride part of the equipment. Hopefully, they have enough smarts to figure out that telling me "but the horses love their job" isn't gonna cut it. Those horses jump those fences because of these reasons: training, talent, and trust. I may not be able to ride as well as them, never will, but never doubt my ability to reason or smell crap when I'm around it.

So yes, I am expecting the elite, the professionals, the TEAM riders to be as upset as we all are and to take time out to make sure the rest of us respect them for more than being able to ride.

[denny]

For as long as anyone alive can remember, until the past several years, eventing was a certain kind of horse sport.
It tested certain qualities of horse and rider, to some extent dressage, to some extent show jumping, but mainly it tested speed, endurance, and cross country jumping.
The dressage and show jumping specialists already had their sports----even in the Olympics.
The generation before mine, of which Gen. Burton is about the last of the line, handed my generation (mid 50s-late 60s) a sport not dissimilar from theirs.
My generation handed that same intact sport to this current one.
This is the generation---ULRs, FEI, XC designers, etc---that changed eventing.
Perhaps it`s not entirely unfair to say that this is also the generation that broke it.
So I`m looking for some leadership from these people to fix what they`ve apparently broken.
I haven`t seen it yet.

[LLDM]

Don't need to "ask them". It is right there on the web site.
http://www.useventing.com/resources/files/docs/2008_USEA_BOG_committee_diretory.pdf
Yes, finally it is. But it took forever. I started asking for that stuff last year and got told over and over again that it will be on the web soon. So don't be surprised that people had given up trying to find it there. Sorry - don't mean to be snarky, but honest to goodness, I was beginning to think it was a state secret. :lol:

The ULR's are speaking out. But directly to whomever is working for the USEA in some capacity while at a show. Otherwise, they aren't on the internet avoiding work like the rest of us.
I know my instructor is voicing her concerns. Not to us, but to folks at the USEA whenever she gets a chance.
They are speaking up, just not in this format.
There has been feedback to Kevin and the like from the ULR's. They aren't making proposals on a whim or just by us, they are also speaking directly to the ULR's that are out there on the front lines getting injured.

I doubt there are many people on this BB who expect ULRs to post their thoughts on ths BB. BUT, can you point me towards the print publications where they are taking a stand so that we LLRs and ULRs KNOW their VALUES - let me repeat that last word because it matters to me: VALUES. It matters to me if the ULRs consider the animals they ride part of the equipment. Hopefully, they have enough smarts to figure out that telling me "but the horses love their job" isn't gonna cut it. Those horses jump those fences because of these reasons: training, talent, and trust. I may not be able to ride as well as them, never will, but never doubt my ability to reason or smell crap when I'm around it.

So yes, I am expecting the elite, the professionals, the TEAM riders to be as upset as we all are and to take time out to make sure the rest of us respect them for more than being able to ride.

My trainer ran Rolex this year and when she got back, I talked with her about the UL disasters of late. Her take was very much personal responsibility and knowing which shows to go to - when to call it a day - and never going in unprepared. She is very conservative with her students and horses and we go in to our shows prepared - not always to win, but with the skills to survive the levels we are at and most of the time her students are in the ribbons.

I think trainers are speaking out within their circle of influence and to their students. unfortunately, politics are a fact of life in any career, and people will not publicly bite the hand that feeds them. I know I won't in my career.

She takes it seriously - I think a big split in recreational/professional is not helpful - those of us who finance the ULs want to see them at the shows with us - its fun and increasing the split/training methods/x-country techniques is not a good solution - I hope this this safety summit is productive!

I think Denny's proposal is a bit draconian but perhaps these are times that need those measures - I however, hope there is another way.

Yes - It's all well and good that they are "talking amongst themselves". But I don't see how they expect any support from the "rest of us" if we are excluded from their thought processes.

I have heard from a couple ULRs over the last couple of months and honestly - I don't think they are ready or willing to look directly at the problem. I still hear mostly denial.

Yes, I DO remember the real carnage of 30 years ago. I DO remember those of my age group (graduating juniors then) who chose NOT to go Professional even though they had the support, the opportunity and the God given talent because upper level eventing was too hard on the horses they loved and respected. These are people who now have regular jobs and normal lives - most still ride and have horses. Think about that. And think about how many we are losing now.

Changes WERE MADE 30 years ago. Eventing got BETTER! Fewer horses died. But the correct answers to the questions from then - become inadequate for the problems of today. That, and eventing has been changed not so much in reaction to internally developed problems - but because of external, logistical, economical issues. It's time (passed time) to do a real and thorough rethink.

SCFarm

[Janet]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janet http://chronicleforums.com/Forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://chronicleforums.com/Forum/showthread.php?p=3206135#post3206135)
Don't need to "ask them". It is right there on the web site.
http://www.useventing.com/resources/...e_diretory.pdf (http://www.useventing.com/resources/files/docs/2008_USEA_BOG_committee_diretory.pdf)


Yes, finally it is. But it took forever. I started asking for that stuff last year and got told over and over again that it will be on the web soon. So don't be surprised that people had given up trying to find it there. Sorry - don't mean to be snarky, but honest to goodness, I was beginning to think it was a state secret. :lol:
SCFarm
I never had any difficulty finding it on the web site- though it used to be in a different format.

Apart from anything else, it has, at least since 2005, been published once a year in the magazine-usually the Jan-Feb or Mar-April issue.

[LLDM]

I never had any difficulty finding it on the web site- though it used to be in a different format.

Apart from anything else, it has, at least since 2005, been published once a year in the magazine-usually the Jan-Feb or Mar-April issue.

If that is true, why was it so difficult for someone at the office to tell me that when I called and emailed numerous times in the early spring of 2007? After being asked "why do you want to know?" I was told it would be up on the website shortly. I checked every month for 4 or 5 months and then just gave up. I was surprised to find it there just recently - but I quick copied it down and printed it out - in case it were to disappear again. :)

Seriously - I get that you all who are plugged in think it is so easy to get information. Guess what - it isn't. It doesn't mean that people aren't nice. It doesn't mean they don't do their jobs. But for crying out loud, you all come across as a VERY closed off bunch.

SCFarm

[Janet]

Oh, I agree it often isn't easy to find stuff.
I don't remember having any difficulty finding the committee list- but all sorts of other stuff- yes.
Often I KNOW it is there, but can't find it.

[Firefox]

[QUOTE=colliemom;3206432 I know I (and all of my friends who pursue this sport) approach it very seriously, spend a lot of hard earned money on training and lessons, and clinics, and work very hard to get as good as we can be at our chosen leve. LisaB, you and I batted this around a few months ago!.[/QUOTE]

Colliemom, that is why I work :) just so I can play (pun intended) with the ponies, I think that we do take this seriously and work very hard at making ourselves better. I hate what has bee happening at the UL's and I hope that we can all work together to make it better :)

[LisaB]

Hmmm, well, we do this recreationally though. While we bust our butt trying to be the best, there is a distinction. I know I passed up on some horses that were geared towards pros. Why? I didn't want to deal with their quirks because I want to enjoy the small amount of time I have with my horse. Meanwhile, I seem to have bought the quirkiest one on the ground :D.
Anyway, I think our problem is that we don't want to create a rift between us. That's why we have the divisions we have and we pitched a fit over having 2 track system.
And our communication is different. The pros live in a different world than us. It is a symbiotic relationship though. And the pros that are instructors, trainers, judges, td's, cd's, etc. Realize this. The pros that are straight competitors (not horsemen, not riders, not horse trainers) is where the rift lies. They are the ones hell bent to move a horse up or finish the course, no matter what the cost. And they have a really hard time relating to us.

[KBG Eventer]

For what it's worth:


However, if splitting the two worlds is what it takes, then perhaps it's for the best. Because this I do know:
-- that I really don't want to see some organization like PETA (which is already pointing a barrel at any and all horse sports, and does have considerable pull within HSUS, which has considerable political pull, et. al) going on a PR rampage and getting ALL eventing shut down; and don't anyone say it can't happen -- a lot of horsepeople said they couldn't get horse slaughter stopped either; it took awhile but what has happened? Every accident (and there are no such things as accidents, according to my old physics teacher -- just occurances that we did not intend nor foresee or decided to ignore), every transgression, every foot in mouth misquote builds a case, and...


I am not saying it absolutely can not happen but simply trying to reassure people who believe PETA can crash eventing. From what I have heard and after some reading on PETA, they are WAY too disorganized to be the one thing that pulls eventing apart. Just IMO.

[rp4241]

Ok, I'm starting to get annoyed.

Just because they don't print it, doesn't mean they're not saying it at home to their friends and clients. THEY ARE. Moreover, assuming a "leadership" role is difficult for many younger ULRs, not only for political reasons, but also due to the time constraints they face--they have to teach, compete, live their lives, etc. GIVE THEM A BREAK.

Secondly, I may be a lone voice here, but I am getting increasingly concerned about the way conversations about "saving eventing" are going. THE LAST THING I WANT IS AN OVER-REGULATED SPORT, THAT WIDENS THE GULF BETWEEN PROFESSIONALS AND AMATEURS.

Here's my new policy for eveting: Do what YOU can. Stop asking why others aren't doing ENOUGH. And please find a new sport if you can only be negative about the state and the future of our shared passion.


Thank you! I also find the assumption that the ULR's aren't doing anything or don't care to be so frustrating! Yes, just because they aren't posting on this board or having articles published online does not mean that they are not spending hours in meetings and on the phone with each other trying to figure out what they can do to make things better for eventing. I know for a fact that they are working hard to make changes. But they are trying to sort through all the issues and be very thoughtful about the proposals they put forward. I know that they will make their thoughts and recommendations public when they are ready. I believe that the point of the safety summit in June is to bring all of these different discussion groups together in one place so keep the discussion alive here, as I'm sure the pro's will continue to do in their own formats.

~Rebecca

[ezmissg]

I hope that my one post to this thread didn't aggravate anyone; if so, I apologize.

So, I will try to re-word my thoughts. Denny's original statement referred to "leadership". That is what caught my eye -- not merely whether anyone makes a statement, but whether the "big cheese" ULR's are showing LEADERSHIP. Did Phillip Dutton's comments on his site LEAD anyone? Did the Laws' statements LEAD anything? Etc, etc.

Gnep recently noted somewhere about 5-7 reasons why this doesn't happen, and I thought he was SPOT ON, btw.

Maybe I expect too much (and am often let down), but I want to see something more than "talking among themselves"...because I know the pros do that in the stabling areas after watching bad rides, but I haven't heard of anything pro-active come from those chats. If someone on this board has, please share them and help sustain my faith in humanity! ;)

I am going to the summit in June, and I am SO HOPEFUL that all my cynicism is dispelled there. Because I love my friends who compete, I want them to be safe in the sport....and because I am such a sap for horses, I don't want to see even one more die because he put his faith in his human partners, who somehow didn't hold up their end of the deal.

Thanks "for listening".

[metzengerstein]

The generation before mine, of which Gen. Burton is about the last of the line, handed my generation (mid 50s-late 60s) a sport not dissimilar from theirs.
My generation handed that same intact sport to this current one.
This is the generation---ULRs, FEI, XC designers, etc---that changed eventing.What would those generations say now? :( How would they fix it?

[denny]

I`m trying to think of an analogy that works----Let`s say a certain type of airplane, say a 747 (whatever), has several disasters.
To an outsider, the aviation industry is in crisis. To insiders, the problem is with what`s going on with the 747.
I don`t think EVENTING, in caps, is in trouble, but I do think upper level eventing is.
I wouldn`t say, "My daughter is never going to event", for example, because as an insider I know that the risk factors at the various lower levels are about what they`ve always been.
OK, maybe a bit more technical, from the trickle down effect, but about the same as in 1998, 1988, etc.
The cataclysmic changes---long format to short format, eventing as sport becoming eventing as profession---these have primarily hit intermediate and advanced divisions, and somewhat prelim. About, what, 500 riders out of 25,000? That`s one rider out of 50.
So don`t panic if you are eventing at the levels below those 2, maybe 3.
Or at least don`t panic on your own behalf, but maybe on theirs.
Also, since they bought into those changes----remember our initiative to save the long format, and how they blew us off?---they need to take some responsibility for getting themselves out of their mess.
And I would repeat my question. Where is the LEADERSHIP?

[Fence2Fence]

Denny,

Do you believe the long format is a dead and done deal? Or is it one of those things that is dependent on the ULRs...and again on Leadership?

It just seems like it part of the cure for the many ills that plague upper level eventing...

[denny]

We don`t know. They (ULRs) don`t speak!
I think they went to Mute School.

[Sandy M]

I don't event any more, but from what my friends who event are telling me, the technicalities ARE filtering down, making it a problem for even the lower levels.

One person told me that they had recently taken a horse BN at a long existing event - always considered an "easy move up" type of event. While there were other fences on course she felt were questionable, one in particular was an EXTREMELY difficult question for a BN horse. She was a very experienced rider on a "new to eventing" horse, and said that when she did the course walk, she spent an incredible amount of time trying to figure out HOW to jump that one fence safely on a green horse. She was on the verge of scratching, then thought, "this approach might work, and he'll stop if it doesn't..." which is what happened.

Her comment thereafter: "I'm not enjoying this any more." An EXPERIENCED RIDER at BN? and the fence is too difficult to figure out!?!? This is bad course design. Glad I'm a DQ now, I guess.

The TD and Ground Jury just shrugged at the competitors complaints.

[cchomey]

Ok, I'm starting to get annoyed.

Just because they don't print it, doesn't mean they're not saying it at home to their friends and clients. THEY ARE. Moreover, assuming a "leadership" role is difficult for many younger ULRs, not only for political reasons, but also due to the time constraints they face--they have to teach, compete, live their lives, etc. GIVE THEM A BREAK.

Secondly, I may be a lone voice here, but I am getting increasingly concerned about the way conversations about "saving eventing" are going. THE LAST THING I WANT IS AN OVER-REGULATED SPORT, THAT WIDENS THE GULF BETWEEN PROFESSIONALS AND AMATEURS.

Here's my new policy for eventing: Do what YOU can. Stop asking why others aren't doing ENOUGH. And please find a new sport if you can only be negative about the state and the future of our shared passion.

Amen to that !

[displacedyank]

Why can't the sport split into two? The "recreation" riders that Denny refers to, let's call them "Nationals" The "pros", let's call them the "Internationals".

Why can't us National's (hey, power in numbers, right?) split away from the Internationals and have our 1/2*'s, *'s, and the CCI's to shoot for as our ultimate goal? We'll bring back our own fearless leaders in the likes of Denny and Jimmy.

Let them International's deal with the mess they got themselves in. Let them struggle with their own sinking levels and problems in the sport...that they created. Let them aspire to CIC's and International competition. More power to them. And let the Capt lead them.

Ok, maybe not practical, but it's food for thought.

And for those of you who are defending the ULRs, saying that they are concerned and speaking directly to the USEA instead of on a public place such as this BB. I have a few words to that. By being an ULR, much like a pro-ANYTHING, you do have an obligation, whether you like it or not, to your "fans" and your followers and the LLs in your sport. The ULRs may not like it, but it is there. By not addressing the problems (in ANY format, either by BB or by articles or by statments, etc.) and keeping mum to the public and the LLR's, it's as good as ignoring and not addressing the issues, whether that is really the case or not. By staying silent to the LL's, it is STILL saying "Hey, you LLR's don't deserve to hear my thoughts. You're not good enough or important enough." Simply put.


slinking back to my cubby hole now.....

[LisaB]

I was kinda thinking along the same lines Yank. In that I was thinking of instead of having the developing riders being a part of the CMP camp and FEI and such, have the USEA do a developing riders program. Have it separate and apart from the USEF and FEI goombas. Have the coach be Denny or Jimmy. We set training sessions like the rider list but this coach is really just a coach. They have these training sessions to ensure the young stock takes advantage of their wisdom instead of willy-nilly training here and there. Bring back the school theory. The coach can call the shots without repercussions of losing a student, really. They are backed by the USEA and funded by them. I don't think any of us would mind an extra $10 membership increase if it means getting the up and comers the program that they need in order to be safe and do better. This offsets the costs of the rider.
You see, by the time CMP gets to these folks, there's not a whole he really does. He's not going to break someone down to the bare bones because they need it. He doesn't have time nor is are the powers that be going to give him the resources to do a school of such. We had this before and we need it again.
Who on the US Team in the past 15 years HASN'T trained with either one of them, really? But you must admit, as of late the youngster have had sketchy training. They flit from BNR to BNR. Rarely do you see one really putting their nose to the grindstone once they get a taste of doing well at the * and above. They leave the homework behind and try to market themselves like the BNR's without that back knowledge.

[fourhorses]

Never underestimate the power of ignorant fanatics to rain on your parade if you give them half a chance.

I think it's really time for the eventing world to realize that they aren't immune to the slings and barbs of folks with a anti-horse sport agenda, with hte backing of a non-horse savvy (or even non-event savvy) public behind them.

When there are other horse people out there throwing around (public, on the record) comments to the tune of: "from what I see eventing is crueler and more dangerous for horses than racing is"; "I don't think I want to go to mini-events after all, it seems as though eventing has gotten too hard on the horses and too dangerous for the riders and I'm afraid to go do it"; and let me reiterate "I don't want to see you lease a pony to that "eventing" family, he's going to break down over the jumps they are probably going to run him at" (hello, when did going to possibly one or two tadpoles (on different horses), hopefully going to BN, N = well, I don't know what the assumption still has me boggled, all I know is the pony in question has to hop higher to get in the horse trailer and is galloped not at all....Rolex....hardly).
Then I think it's time to do some cleaning house before things get taken quite out of context and get quite out of hand. The misconceptions and assumptions being drawn by folks outside of the sport (aka the majority of people in the world) could very easily be used to bring the whole thing to an end if someone with an anti-eventing agenda cares to start firing the broadsides. This has always been a problem, but now we live in a computer/video driven age -- repercussions happen much more quickly.

[pwynnnorman]

Maybe I expect too much (and am often let down), but I want to see something more than "talking among themselves"...because I know the pros do that in the stabling areas after watching bad rides, but I haven't heard of anything pro-active come from those chats. If someone on this board has, please share them and help sustain my faith in humanity! ;)



But they do. The Professional Horseman's Council (I keep calling it the Professional Event Riders Assocation, but that's the European equivalent, I think) has tried a lot of things to bring about change, but 1.) it apparently does get a lot of respect from decisionmakers and 2.) it seems to be very bad at promoting its existance.

As a result, few know that there is an active group of riders trying to have an influence on the sport. And according to William Fox-Pitt and also Mark Todd (in their books), this is the case over the pond as well. Nor does anyone know exactly what they have proposed. Oh, well. Riders aren't too great at promoting themselves when the need isn't associated with riding a horse.

Here is who are on that council. Why not email them and ask what they've done/are doing/want to do? I've heard of a few things, but I'd get my head chopped off for putting anything here, so someone else is gonna have to!



PHC Members
Frederic Bouland - Fbets@cox.net (Fbets@cox.net)
Jan Byyny – jan@surefireeventing.com (jan@surefireeventing.com)
Will Coleman - wcoleman5883@gmail.com (wcoleman5883@gmail.com)
Bobby Costello – rcostello@gmail.com (rcostello@gmail.com)
Phyllis Dawson – pwindchase@aol.com (pwindchase@aol.com)
Eric Dierks – ercdrks@aol.com (ercdrks@aol.com)
Phillip Dutton - Trueprospectfarm@aol.com (Trueprospectfarm@aol.com)
Peter Gray – psgray007@hotmail.com (psgray007@hotmail.com)
Holly Hepp – holly@hollyheppeventing.com (holly@hollyheppeventing.com)
Jonathan and Jennifer Holling – willowrunfarm@hotmail.com (willowrunfarm@hotmail.com)
Liza Horan – lah1996@aol.com (lah1996@aol.com)
Mike Huber – mikehuberusa@hotmail.com (mikehuberusa@hotmail.com)
Robert Kellerhouse – rkeller92592@verizon.net (rkeller92592@verizon.net)
Carol Kozlowski – mothersfield@aol.com (mothersfield@aol.com)
Gina Miles – ginamiles@msn.com (ginamiles@msn.com)
Bonnie Mosser - pointabovefarm@aol.com (pointabovefarm@aol.com)
Karen O'Connor – ocet93@aol.com (ocet93@aol.com)
Kim Severson – kvinoski@aol.com (kvinoski@aol.com)
Craig Thompson – craigthompsoneventing@gmail.com (craigthompsoneventing@gmail.com)
Amy Tryon – furrypony@aol.com (furrypony@aol.com)
Cathy Weischhoff – cathy@cwevent.com (cathy@cwevent.com)
John Williams – boscowilliams@earthlink.net (boscowilliams@earthlink.net)

[NeverTime]

Actually, PWynn, you aren't too far off on the name: At Jersey Fresh, there was an organizational meeting for a group that would be called the "Professional event Riders Organization," meant to represent riders competing at the "highest levels of the sport."
I did not attend the meeting b/c I don't fall into that category, but it did seem to garner interest and good attendance. Plus, it's another example of what they are doing.

Just a few of their goals, according to the document that was circulated to JF competitors:

• Provide a strong, unified voice for upper level, professional event riders with direct influence over policy making within the sport and media attention of the sport.
• Encourage the free exchange of ideas and assist in consensus building to influence the current governing organizations of the sport by:
==> Increasing representation on boards and committees of current organizations
==> Providing clout to the voting power of professional riders
==> Influencing the media in a direct and timely fashion

• Develop a comprehensive membership plan to outline the criteria and professional development requirements necessary for each level of competition.

[pwynnnorman]

Well, there you go then.

Too bad it's the weekend coming. But I'm going to revive this thread a few times if it dies. (But, gee, it'd be nice if that group had distributed a press release about their efforts. Sigh. Riders. Professional horse communicators. Not always so great with humans.)

[NeverTime]

In fairness to them, I believe the meeting was purely organizational in nature -- ie, to gauge interest in whether riders would be interested in forming such a group. Not quite far enough along to start broadcasting intentions.
I'm sure that, once they get organized and decide what they want to say, they'll communicate it better.
For now, I think the mere fact that certain folks decided to put the meeting together speaks to the idea that -- even though they don't have time to sit on internet BBs debating the day away -- they are concerned and mobilizing.

[bambam]

The fact that the Professional Horseman's Council is trying to bring about change does nothing to comfort me. The only public statement that I am aware of that they have made about recent safety issues was the one right after Red Hills was the one published on the USEA website where they blew off safety concerns (at least that is my take on their essentially useless statement). I am not planning on relying on them to fix our sport

[NeverTime]

OK ... so the crux is: If they aren't saying what you want to hear, they aren't doing anything?

Not meaning to pick on you bambam, but that seems to be the thrust of a lot of these posts. Somehow, people recognize those -- Denny, Jimmy, Bruce -- who have said what they want to hear and ignore those who had a different opinion.

It seems to me that a lot of people HAVE spoken out -- and, yes, the PHC, Phillip, CMP etc., did so more to recognize the problem but counsel a more measured approach to what needs to be done. But not agreeing with the BBers doesn't equal "not doing anything."

Perhaps the wisest leadership is the leadership that understands it might be best NOT to respond with a knee-jerk reaction and new regulations that, fueled by emotion and intuition rather than research, will have their own set of unintended consequences.

[pwynnnorman]

In fairness to them, I believe the meeting was purely organizational in nature -- ie, to gauge interest in whether riders would be interested in forming such a group. Not quite far enough along to start broadcasting intentions.
I'm sure that, once they get organized and decide what they want to say, they'll communicate it better.
For now, I think the mere fact that certain folks decided to put the meeting together speaks to the idea that -- even though they don't have time to sit on internet BBs debating the day away -- they are concerned and mobilizing.

I am a little confused, though, NeverTime. I was under the impression that a group has been together for a while. I was confused about the name and then found the PHC statement. Do you know what is/will be the difference between those groups--or is a consolidation being planned? As Bambam stated, PHC did have a press release on useventing.com.

However, Bambam, one thing you might want to keep in mind: PHC can recommend changes, but if those recommendations are not accepted and acted upon, you'll never know they tried. My understanding is that that is indeed what has happened on occasion. So don't judge them by that press release. They have had ideas and have made an effort. It's just that the decision making process is more complex than that.

[riderboy]

I'm one of the great unwashed masses. But in my work I try to remember a couple of maxims- the most important is that attitude reflects leadership. If the ULRs have gone to mute school they better get out quickly. Their leadership or lack of it has a direct bearing on the attitudes on all of us scratching our heads right now. Where are the peer review organizations to look into these problems and look into them publicly.? I have a zillion questions- What the hell happened at the Flower Basket and Footbridge? Was it rider, coach, fence or what? Or is it inherent in a dangerous sport. Just thinking out loud which for someone with just enough knowledge to be dangerous may not come across so well.

[NeverTime]

I am a little confused, though, NeverTime. I was under the impression that a group has been together for a while. I was confused about the name and then found the PHC statement. Do you know what is/will be the difference between those groups--or is a consolidation being planned? As Bambam stated, PHC did have a press release on useventing.com.

However, Bambam, one thing you might want to keep in mind: PHC can recommend changes, but if those recommendations are not accepted and acted upon, you'll never know they tried. My understanding is that that is indeed what has happened on occasion. So don't judge them by that press release. They have had ideas and have made an effort. It's just that the decision making process is more complex than that.

I wasn't clear. The PHC is the established organization you are thinking of. At Jersey Fresh, a group of people met to talk about forming "PRO" - the Professional event Riders Organization. Different, nascent organization, with the goals I described in my previous post, meant to be broad-based for riders competing at the top level, rather than the more limited "board of directors" style group that the PHC is.

[ezmissg]

Actually, PWynn, you aren't too far off on the name: At Jersey Fresh, there was an organizational meeting for a group that would be called the "Professional event Riders Organization," meant to represent riders competing at the "highest levels of the sport."
I did not attend the meeting b/c I don't fall into that category, but it did seem to garner interest and good attendance. Plus, it's another example of what they are doing.

Just a few of their goals, according to the document that was circulated to JF competitors:

• Provide a strong, unified voice for upper level, professional event riders with direct influence over policy making within the sport and media attention of the sport.
• Encourage the free exchange of ideas and assist in consensus building to influence the current governing organizations of the sport by:
==> Increasing representation on boards and committees of current organizations
==> Providing clout to the voting power of professional riders
==> Influencing the media in a direct and timely fashion

• Develop a comprehensive membership plan to outline the criteria and professional development requirements necessary for each level of competition.

Wow! That is great! Thank you so much for passing this on! I hope they continue to move forward!

[ezmissg]

But they do. The Professional Horseman's Council (I keep calling it the Professional Event Riders Assocation, but that's the European equivalent, I think) has tried a lot of things to bring about change, but 1.) it apparently does get a lot of respect from decisionmakers and 2.) it seems to be very bad at promoting its existance.

As a result, few know that there is an active group of riders trying to have an influence on the sport. And according to William Fox-Pitt and also Mark Todd (in their books), this is the case over the pond as well. Nor does anyone know exactly what they have proposed. Oh, well. Riders aren't too great at promoting themselves when the need isn't associated with riding a horse.

Here is who are on that council. Why not email them and ask what they've done/are doing/want to do? I've heard of a few things, but I'd get my head chopped off for putting anything here, so someone else is gonna have to!



PHC Members
Frederic Bouland - Fbets@cox.net (Fbets@cox.net)
Jan Byyny – jan@surefireeventing.com (jan@surefireeventing.com)
Will Coleman - wcoleman5883@gmail.com (wcoleman5883@gmail.com)
Bobby Costello – rcostello@gmail.com (rcostello@gmail.com)
Phyllis Dawson – pwindchase@aol.com (pwindchase@aol.com)
Eric Dierks – ercdrks@aol.com (ercdrks@aol.com)
Phillip Dutton - Trueprospectfarm@aol.com (Trueprospectfarm@aol.com)
Peter Gray – psgray007@hotmail.com (psgray007@hotmail.com)
Holly Hepp – holly@hollyheppeventing.com (holly@hollyheppeventing.com)
Jonathan and Jennifer Holling – willowrunfarm@hotmail.com (willowrunfarm@hotmail.com)
Liza Horan – lah1996@aol.com (lah1996@aol.com)
Mike Huber – mikehuberusa@hotmail.com (mikehuberusa@hotmail.com)
Robert Kellerhouse – rkeller92592@verizon.net (rkeller92592@verizon.net)
Carol Kozlowski – mothersfield@aol.com (mothersfield@aol.com)
Gina Miles – ginamiles@msn.com (ginamiles@msn.com)
Bonnie Mosser - pointabovefarm@aol.com (pointabovefarm@aol.com)
Karen O'Connor – ocet93@aol.com (ocet93@aol.com)
Kim Severson – kvinoski@aol.com (kvinoski@aol.com)
Craig Thompson – craigthompsoneventing@gmail.com (craigthompsoneventing@gmail.com)
Amy Tryon – furrypony@aol.com (furrypony@aol.com)
Cathy Weischhoff – cathy@cwevent.com (cathy@cwevent.com)
John Williams – boscowilliams@earthlink.net (boscowilliams@earthlink.net)

Thank you for responding with more information!

I added the bold to one comment above, because it brought to mind "Let's give it to Mikey! Hey, Mikey!" :winkgrin: :lol:

I am so looking forward to Lexington, so I'll try to wait patiently (not my strong suit) to see what happens there.

But afterwards, I might give it a shot! I mean, hey -- what are they going to do? Eat me? :eek: :winkgrin:

[faluut42]

I know a lot of people on here are are saying people should do something about all this (and dont get me wrong some people are), but a lot of people seem to be relying on the people higher up to make the changes. Why not try and make a change for yourself. Work your way up, contact your area chairman, see if anyone else in your area (or outside of it) is willing to contribute ideas.

I have a feeling that if eventing has a crack, things will (very slowly) start to break up. It would kill me to see the sport get broken up, becasue my life, like many, LITERALLY revloves around horses and eventing (ULs, LLs, and everything inbetween :D).

I may sound dramatic but I got the same feeling when they accounced that they where no longer going to use the long format. That those descions would change the sport.

(geez i sound like a shmultzy soap opera);)

[pwynnnorman]

I mentioned this in a PM with someone, but I think I'll mention it here, too.

I think one of the healthiest developments for the sport would be term limits on committee members, immediate solicitation online when seats become available and a strict limit to how many committees an individual can sit on.

I'm probably not making myself terribly popular by saying this, but y'know, folks have found their ways onto committees just by having walked down a hallway at the right moment in time. I really think there are better ways to put enthusiastic folks with insight and perspective onto committees. Turnover won't necessarily result in constant change. In fact, good ideas and programs would be reaffirmed, while shaky ones would be shored up or discarded.

But most importantly, opening up committees by bringing in fresh, "unattached" blood and by asking, not "expecting", volunteers would make "the masses" feel much more empowered and connected to the decision making process, IMO. And please understand that I'm not pointing a finger exclusively at USEA here. Committee issues like this are a curiously common trait of most horse organizations it seems.

[JER]

Very good words there, pwynn.

To add to that, I'd like to see people on committees with some kind of qualification to be on that particular committee. And perhaps there should be a limit to the number of committees per individual.

[RunForIt]

Very good words there, pwynn.

To add to that, I'd like to see people on committees with some kind of qualification to be on that particular committee. And perhaps there should be a limit to the number of committees per individual.

As a member out here in the masses, I'd appreciate a way to know the goals of each committee and quarterly publication of info related to committee's work toward those goals. :) :cool:

[JER]

As a member out here in the masses, I'd appreciate a way to know the goals of each committee and quarterly publication of info related to committee's work toward those goals.

Definitely yes.

Communication. Benchmarks. Drop-dead dates. Accountability.

[pwynnnorman]

I had mentioned that in my PM discussion with someone, too: publishing the minutes of meetings online. But summary on a quarterly basis in Eventing would be just as good, if not better.

Maybe we should try writing a rule change proposal about this? (Granted, I can tell you that when I was involved in a similar effort in h-j land, our proposal about committees never got off the ground because it was deemed an operational/administrative matter, not a membership/competition one.)

Anyway, I have family in New Orleans, so I'm planning to attend the convention this year. Anyone want to join me in seeing how far we could get with a plan to empower the masses :D?

[LexInVA]

Very good words there, pwynn.

To add to that, I'd like to see people on committees with some kind of qualification to be on that particular committee. And perhaps there should be a limit to the number of committees per individual.

It would be nice too if they kicked the donors off of the boards. There's no reason why a wealthy donor should be on any committee unless they are an active upper level rider who has given something other than money to the sports. There's too much "My Money. My Way." going on with the USET and USEF that has carried influence over into other groups.

[pwynnnorman]

It would be nice too if they kicked the donors off of the boards. There's no reason why a wealthy donor should be on any committee unless they are an active upper level rider who has given something other than money to the sports. There's too much "My Money. My Way." going on with the USET and USEF that has carried influence over into other groups.

No way, Lex. That would fly in the face of critical guidelines in non-profit management. Lemme see if I can find the reference from my favorite 600 page tome (textbook used when I guided a seminar on the subject).

Argh, it's not in the index. Anyway, most in the field would agree that one of the most important functions of members on a board of directors is to "ensure that there are adequate resources to carry out the mission," (from my old notes). One oft-put saying along those lines is, in fact: "Give, get or get off."

Here's one online reference that might help put the issue into perspective (from which I'll highlight the following question about choosing BOD members -- "Does the board contain members who have personal influence and financial resources to help attract support to the organization?"): http://www.nonprofitexpert.com/board_guide.htm

That's a BOD, though, not an ordinary committee, of course. But I'm not sure that committees are all that comprised of donors anyway--how would those who appoint even know? Most are comprised of people who know people who know people, etc. What is troublesome about most committees (everywhere--and the larger the organization, the more likely this is the case) is that who they are NOT comprised of are "simple" volunteers--folks who can invest and/or have invested nothing in the subject except their time. (NOTE: I said "most," not all there. There are always exceptions, some quite numerous...but I don't think that that "numerous" is the case in horsedom).