2022 New Rules Proposed - MERs Required to Move Up

[173north]

Why aren’t the MERs / licensing different for juniors, amateurs and pros? I’d be in favor of tough MERs for juniors/young riders to keep them safe and insulate trainers from parental/student pressure to move up, even if that ultimately means that only the wealthiest kids from eventing-heavy areas will make it to YR.

And if you’ve declared yourself a pro, I feel there should be more licensing levels that allow you to take a horse around its first prelim or catch ride for a colleague without having to run a bunch of events as a pair first. An amateur shouldn’t have to ship their horse to a BNT for its first prelim run if they have a capable trainer at home, and this will also impact the business of smaller pros who make their money bringing horses up the level. The point above that this will drain pros and trainers from areas that already need them is a really good one, too.

[Jealoushe]

They have basically done that, just by MERS instead of labels like “pro” or “ammie”.

Plenty of ammies who ride better than some pros, and some pros who shouldn’t be calling themselves that. I’m sure that’s why they went for a grading system instead.

[Thames_Pirate]

Another idea:

Modified division MERs could replace two Training MERs for up to two Ms? So you could do 4 T and 2 M or 6 T and 1 M or 8 T–that is a total of three variations that would allow you to do it faster and might increase interest in the M division. I know in areas with fewer events there are not yet many M courses, but it does offer some options.

One could also say that someone who has completed at least 5 Prelims (or whatever number–I haven’t ridden at Prelim and so am not the person to make the numbers) could take a horse Prelim with just a Modified, for example. That would allow for more easy catch riding or for the ammy who has bought an experienced horse to avoid pounding to get the qualifications.

There are lots of ways the M division could be used more effectively in the qualification process, particularly for those who are unlicensed but may have some miles at Prelim.

[Gardenhorse]

@Thames_Pirate

Modified division MERs could replace two Training MERs for up to two Ms? So you could do 4 T and 2 M or 6 T and 1 M or 8 T–that is a total of three variations that would allow you to do it faster and might increase interest in the M division. I know in areas with fewer events there are not yet many M courses, but it does offer some options.

Modified is already allowed to contribute to the MERs needed for Prelim under the proposed rule change.

“UL competitors and the horse, as a combination, must have obtained an MER at six Horse Trials at the Training Level or higher, plus two additional MER at the Training Level or higher with no more than 20 Jumping Penalties at obstacles on the Cross Country test.”

“Training level or higher” includes Modified.

Edited to add: Oops. Trubandloki pointed out that I misread Thames_Pirate’s proposal. So ignore this comment. I’ll go get more coffee.

[trubandloki]

@Gardenhorse

Modified is already allowed to contribute to the MERs needed for Prelim under the proposed rule change.

The proposal that @Thames_Pirate posted has a MER at modified counting as two Training level MERs, not one for one.

[Gardenhorse]

Oh, I see. I misread that. Thanks. Interesting idea.

[Jealoushe]

I have to disagree. Modified isn’t that big of a difference from Training it should count as 2.

Although I’m all for more experience before upgrading. While some may have to do more events that might not need to, many who do need to will be forced to, thankfully.

Also, just because someone went Prelim on one horse a few times doesn’t mean they have the experience to then take another. I went Prelim approximately 6 times all but one clear XC as a 15 year old and no way would I have been capable on doing Prelim on any other horse other than that amazing one I was lucky enough to own. It’s insane I even did it back then because I was totally clueless. I just got lucky my horse was always a foot over the fences and knew how to set himself up and was super rideable lol

[Thames_Pirate]

@Jealoushe

I have to disagree. Modified isn’t that big of a difference from Training it should count as 2.

Although I’m all for more experience before upgrading. While some may have to do more events that might not need to, many who do need to will be forced to, thankfully.

I guess my thinking is that it encourages riders to consider doing at least one or two Modifieds. Four Trainings and two Modifieds would still be a LOT better than the current four Trainings, and it would increase the interest in the division. It would also give more flexibility to people in regions with few events while keeping the number at 6 and increasing the quality of the miles. Also, while it’s true that just getting around a Prelim or two doesn’t qualify one to do it with just any horse, there are still miles between someone who has never done Prelim and someone who has done a fair number but isn’t licensed. Creating more licensing levels would be a precursor, obviously–we have already covered that, and I was merely suggesting a way to make the Modified part of the more abbreviated qualification than 8 Trainings.

And your personal example is why I keep saying that a subjective assessment is needed.

[Jealoushe]

I think 4 and 2 modified a wouldn’t be bad, just need those modifieds to be built all over now lol

[hamsterpoop]

I’ll have to disagree with that. The modifieds I’ve seen were a significant jump up from a regular Training and one had to be far more prepared with schoolings and a good trainer to do it. I also simply cannot fathom how repeating multiple shows at a lower level in any way qualifies anyone to move up safely, particularly a jump as big as the one we’re talking about. What is the logic here? All it proves is that a rider can do a bunch of Training level shows safely. Period. And forces more riders, to push horses harder, to enter more USEA recognized shows so USEA can make more money. And then, when Prelim and then Intermediate riders dry up and become few and far between (at least around here) we’ll have …wait for it…fewer injuries!!! Brilliant. They’re killing a dying sport.

[Blugal]

Please send your opinions to the USEA by filling out this survey. It has some weak spots (some questions really needed a “none of the above” or “other” option) - but send it in anyway, with your comments at the end.

Rule Change Proposal Survey

[hamsterpoop]

While I’m at it, I have to wonder how educated the riders are about rotational falls. Like those man on the street interviews where nobody knows basic US history or Civics how many Training (or Novice or even Prelim) riders know the causes of rotational falls. Well here ya go, from Kerry Millikin. She posted on FB so I don’t think she’ll mind me borrowing this absolutely spot on answer…

[Jealoushe]

Well Danny Warrington is the owner of Landsafe so I think it’s fair to say he’s fairly aware of rotational falls and Jon Holling on the Safety committee I’m sure is very aware after they discussed last years and previous fatalities in depth for the last few years to help make changes.

The problem is some riders don’t care. Some riders don’t recognize themselves as “that” rider. I know of two people currently planning on the P upgrade that wouldn’t meet MERS now in the US and thank God for that because they have 0 clue they are “that” rider whose horse isn’t trained enough and can’t jump well enough nor can they ride well enough to save themselves taking a long spot out of control in 80% of their course. Unfortunately in Canada we don’t have these rules so this summer will be a lot of watching and praying more riders don’t die.

Riders aren’t being responsible and neither are coaches so the USEA has forced their hand.

We’ve had two decades to work on rider and trainer responsibilities and no one cared enough to do anything so here we are.

[hamsterpoop]

Obviously. The simple matter of explaining how forcing riders to do more repetitions of a lower level course qualifies them for a faster, more technical and dangerous higher level course remains unanswered. I can’t tell you how many crappy XC runs at Training I’ve had that were double clear. If more time, energy and (limited) resources for ammies are to be directed into more recognized events, then less time, energy and resources are available for clinics, schoolings and lessons. One might say then that perhaps this sport is not for “those people” who aren’t pros living on the East Coast and wintering in Florida. And I’m not sure you’d be wrong.

[Marigold]

@Jealoushe

The problem is some riders don’t care. Some riders don’t recognize themselves as “that” rider. I know of two people currently planning on the P upgrade that wouldn’t meet MERS now in the US and thank God for that because they have 0 clue they are “that” rider whose horse isn’t trained enough and can’t jump well enough nor can they ride well enough to save themselves taking a long spot out of control in 80% of their course. Unfortunately in Canada we don’t have these rules so this summer will be a lot of watching and praying more riders don’t die.

These are two different problems. For example, I definitely care (and I would argue that the vast majority of riders care - no one wants to die out there). But you are right: I might be that rider that doesn’t recognize it. Because, by definition, that rider doesn’t recognize it.

I don’t THINK I am. I have taken many precautions - I bought a good horse and prioritized jump and gallop before flashy movement; I train and base with a coach that knows what he’s doing and has produced double-digit numbers horses and riders to well above my level; I took some time to train with (and realistically, be evaluated by) a world-class coach that definitely knows what she’s doing before I did my most recent upgrade; in every instance I have waited for my coaches to be the ones to suggest the upgrade, not pushing it myself and certainly not threatening to remove my business if someone didn’t give me the green light.

But if so many people here see this issue so often, I am left worried that maybe I am that rider. Because someone is. And it’s clear that the people here who see that unaware rider don’t say something when they see them - so maybe it is me? Maybe it’s my best friend? To be clear, I’m not casting blame - there are a million reasons to expect it might go over like a lead balloon to walk up to a stranger and say “I think you are putting yourself/your horse in unnecessary danger”. But I think this is a cultural change we should try to focus on. We should welcome input from people who may see a section of the course that the TD/your coach/your barnmate has missed. Every pair of knowledgeable eyes is valuable. I WANT someone to tell me if they are worried about me out there. But short of hanging a sign around my neck inviting criticism, I’m not sure how to assure people that it’s safe to speak up and try to save my life.

There are a lot of suggestions on here that are out of our control as individual riders. I can’t control which venues install a Modified, or whether the USEA comes up with a way to certify riders beyond a certain level. But I can make sure that no one who ever shares an honest opinion with me is made to regret that decision. I hope we all can commit to that.

[Thames_Pirate]

And this is why I would love to see subjective tests! It’s increasingly clear from the discussion that this, and only this, will achieve the desired effect.

[enjoytheride]

I agree with the perspective in this opinion article

Perspective: Improving Safety is Laudable, but is This the Right Approach? -...

I’ve heard several people state “horses are expensive and if you can’t afford to move up under the new proposed rules you either take up golf or move to another area of the country where you can”

These people either have unlimited resources so the changes don’t effect them, or they have no desire to run Prelim and want to make the rules harder because they think that level is scary and dangerous.

Why are we using those two groups to restructure?

…Says a low level eventer who thinks Prelim is scary but thinks we can make better rules that increase safety without shoving people out of the sport.

[trubandloki]

@enjoytheride can you summarize what the article says?

[enjoytheride]

“Improving safety is a laudable goal, and one that I am personally passionate about in my own career and life. What upsets me about this proposed rule change is: A – there’s no data indicating that it will actually result in a safety improvement, and B – it comes at a high personal and financial cost to your members, with no proportionate time or financial commitments from USEA to improve the educational experience at those recognized events.”

“Reading the USEA’s most recent comments on the logic behind their changes, it seems like this is exactly the outcome they were hoping for. Amateurs simply aren’t good enough for upper levels, and if I don’t have the money to spend then I’m not welcome.”

[Ghazzu]

@enjoytheride

“Reading the USEA’s most recent comments on the logic behind their changes, it seems like this is exactly the outcome they were hoping for. Amateurs simply aren’t good enough for upper levels, and if I don’t have the money to spend then I’m not welcome.”

This puzzles me (though it appears to be an attitude held by other equestrian federations as well.)
It wouldn’t seem to me that absent the money generated by the Smurfs that USEA and upper level eventing could remain financially solvent.
Yes, riders are a hard-headed bunch, but too many years of being shouted at that you’re not wanted and can’t play in USEA’s sandbox would, I expect, eventually drive the extinction of what they are purportedly trying to preserve.