2022 New Rules Proposed - MERs Required to Move Up

[Janet]

@173north

how many are just going to drop off into other disciplines after running T for a few years?

I wouldn’t think very many.

I did my first event (at Training which was then the lowest level) circa 1970. I then took a break from riding seriously for about 10 years, and have competed at Training and below, for the last 40 years (I did make one unsuccessful attempt at Prelim, after far more than 10 “MERs”). I am certainly not going to stop competing, or change to a different discipline, just because there are a few more hoops to go Prelim.

My understanding is that the VAST majority of eventers have NO DESIRE to compete above Training.

What makes you think that more than a very few will drop out of Eventing because they can’t move up to Prelim too fast?

I have some doubt about the necessity of 8 MERs “as a combination” for a rider who has, say, 20 (but not 25) MERs at Prelim, bringing on a new horse. But I think it is eminently reasonable for a rider moving up to Prelim for the first time

[Jealoushe]

Again, I’m not talking about show nerves. These ads were for riders who were “terrified” riding in the ring at home.

[McGurk]

@Jealoushe

Just some more random thoughts. Just today I have seen 2 ads looking for packers for nervous riders to event. In one ad the poster said the kid is absolutely terrified/ scared to death and needs a horse that will 100% make it across the finish flags. Another ad said the same but about an AA.

I get why they want these for clients, but at what point as a trainer do you say look- if you’re that nervous Eventing isn’t the sport for you. This is exactly why Eventing becomes dangerous. People on course who not only are not experienced Eventing but they are down right terrified to be on XC.

I would love to hear other people’s thoughts on this, and whether others agree or disagree with me.

I didn’t read the ads you saw, so I am going on just your representations here. If these ads are for a horse going Training or Prelim, well, then, yes, that is scary. The rider needs to have their head in the game and be making decisions as soon as they leave the start box, maybe before. There’s no such thing as a Prelim packer, IMO.

However, if we’re talking about your average ammy owner with a full time job, whose doing Intro or Beginner Novice a couple of times a year as their schedule allows, your comments make less sense to me. There’s a whole underrepresented group of riders who simply don’t get enough saddle time to go beyond Novice who still pay their dues and support the sport. If they need a steady Eddie to get out of the start box and around safely, how is that different that someone needing a packer for the 2’6" local division or to foxhunt second or third flight?

If your point is that you shoudn’t be going Prelim when you need a seeing eye dog to get around Training or Novice, point taken!

If your point is that your average AA going Intro or BN shouldn’t be in the sport at all because of nerves or the need of a packer to get them around, I think you are very much mistaken, and that you are attacking the foundation of the sport.

[173north]

@Janet

What makes you think that more than a very few will drop out of Eventing because they can’t move up to Prelim too fast?

Just anecdotally, I’ve seen a handful of Midwest and West Coast eventers who have competed Prelim and would be working on bringing a new horse up to that level say they may refocus on pure SJ and dressage if the rule change passes. The one I specifically remember, the rider spent years at T, has a handful of Prelims under their belt and bought a Prelim schoolmaster pre-covid, but felt to qualify the pair to run P under the new rule would be putting an unfair level of mileage on an older horse. Maybe that is the ‘very few’ and most people will be more than happy to stay in eventing at Training level!

I’m not at all suggesting anyone move up ‘too fast,’ I’m overall in favor of the new MERS requirements. But it does put quite a burden on the amateurs trying to move up who don’t live in an eventing hotbed.

[RainWeasley]

My impression from the interview wasn’t that he has contempt for lower level riders. He sounded more like someone who has been frustrated at a lack of change and all the injuries and deaths, frustration at the response of people who seem to only care about reaching a certain level, and who realistically sees that not everyone should be going prelim. It’s not a “lower level riders suck” thing, it’s a dose of realism. Most people are not going to ever get to prelim successfully. And the push to make that jump is contributing to the wrecks because it seems like there is this preconceived notion that if you aren’t going prelim, you aren’t a “real” eventer.

It is interesting, though, that people have been pushing for change but now that the change is coming they don’t like it. To be perfectly honest, if forcing people to slow down more and really prepare for prelim (or to realize they just don’t have the resources to actually get there without cutting corners) results in less wrecks, I think it sounds great. If it makes no difference, then I think there’s merit in getting upset and wanting them to improve it. The only thing I really see being a problem is lack of events in areas, but I’m not sure that’s a good enough reason to not uphold the changes.

As far as not needing to be as good in all three phases…idk, that also seems like an excuse to cut corners to me. You would think that having competency at all three phases would be more important if you are really looking to move to a more advanced level. Maybe it’s fine up to training to only care about playing on xc, but I would think once you get up to prelim you are more at a pro level and should be striving for more than just “get through dressage and sj so you can go run xc”. Not to mention, don’t some of those questions require more advanced flatwork skills to be able to sit, shorten, lengthen, whatever is required to get through safely? I thought that was the point of dressage being at the levels they are. Maybe I’m totally mistaken though, could have just made that up in my head.

[skydy]

One of the things he mentioned in the article really jumped out at me. He was saying that he was tired of dealing with pressure from parents (whom have never ridden) of 14 15 and 16 year old kids for them to be allowed to move up and do a 2*. I can see how that could get very old very quickly, and bring out the blunt responses he is giving.

For those of you who compete, do you see this parental pushing of young people to move up when it would be unsafe?

[devvie_continued]

For those asking for stats – you’ve confused me, there are stats in the original press release from USEA, here, and one of the relevant stats is that unlicensed rider chance of fall at prelim is 1 in 39 compared to A-rider stat of 1 in 349. Am I missing something?

https://useventing.com/news-media/news/update-on-appendix-3-rule-change-proposal (this link was posted very early on in this thread).

Following feedback from our membership to the rule change proposal for the USEF Rules For Eventing : Appendix 3 – Participation In Horse Trials, the United States Eventing Association (USEA) Board of Governors voted to modify the rule change proposal, but still to recommend the establishment of rider licenses and increase Minimum Eligibility Requirements (MERs) to the regulating authority of the sport US Equestrian (USEF).

The USEA Cross-Country Safety Subcommittee developed the original proposal after a review of serious injuries and fatalities in the sport. The consensus of the group was that the standards needed to be raised to earn the right to move into a higher level of competition. The MER numbers were based on best practices of top-level competitors in the sport as well as data analysis supported by the independent firm EquiRatings. The proposal passed from the Subcommittee to the USEA Board of Governors who made the decision to lower the requirements before it moves to US Equestrian (USEF).

Jonathan Holling, chair of the USEA Cross-Country Safety Subcommittee, spoke to the Board of Governors to explain further the proposal. “All of the officials I have spoken to agree that something needs to change,” said Holling. “When we came out last year with the frangible fence initiative one of the big things that was said to me early on and repeated loud and clear was that 'this is great, this is wonderful, but it isn’t going to solve the problem by itself.’ We need better riding through better qualifications, better coaching – all of it. While we realize that frangible fences are a huge piece of this, we have to have some sort of a rider license and increasing the qualifications going forward. I know that there have been some concerns about Areas that don’t have as many events and I hear you loud and clear, but just know on this committee there are a lot of people that come from all over this country – I am from Milwaukee, Wisconsin, we have Canadians, we have west coasters. The reality is that we have a responsibility to the sport of eventing to do the best we can to make it as safe as possible and I firmly believe this proposal we are putting in front of [the Board] does that.”

Dave Vos, member of the USEA Cross-Country Safety Subcommittee, an amateur eventer, and a highly experienced engineer, joined the call to explain the numbers and data collected by EquiRatings to the Board. “The statistics tell you what the picture is, and they tell us that we need to reduce the fall rate and therefore reduce the risk of serious falls happening,” said Vos. “While addressing risk is the main driver, we are also addressing the quality of riding throughout eventing in the United States and that goes very much hand in hand with additional experience, additional expertise, and additional training in order to move up the ranks. You build a much better foundation if you are way more proficient at Training before you go to Preliminary and so on. Where we are is that the numbers aren’t crazy different from what people are already doing, but they do encourage additional experience and training.”

*UL = Unlicensed

Based on the data prepared the following can be noted:

• Preliminary level : Unlicensed riders (55% of all entries) are falling at a rate of 4.6% , compared to B riders (23% of all entries) at 2% , and A riders (22% of all entries) at 1.3%.
• Intermediate level : Unlicensed riders (30% of all entries) are falling at a rate of 7.5%, compared to B riders (30% of all entries) at 3.4%, and A riders (40% of all entries) at 1.3%.
• Advanced level : Unlicensed riders (10% of all entries) are falling at a rate of 12% , compared to B riders (30% of all entries) at 10%, and A riders (60% of all entries) at 2.8%.

The estimate of conditional probability of a fall given the new licenses yields:

• Likelihood of a fall at Preliminary given rider is unlicensed =1/(4.6/100)/(55/100) = 1 in 39
• Likelihood of a fall at Preliminary given rider is a B =1/(2/100)/(23/100) = 1 in 217
• Likelihood of a fall at Preliminary given rider is an A =1/(1.3/100)/(22/100) = 1 in 349

Before moving up to the Preliminary level riders are currently completing on average:

• Unlicensed riders: 6 MERs (with a +/- 4 standard deviation)
• B riders: 5 MERs (with a +/- 4 standard deviation)
• A riders: 4 MERs (with a +/- 3 standard deviation)

So, a good number are already achieving the new requirements.

[Nadia1990]

This is a massive problem, uneducated parents spending $$$$ for a horse for their kid to move through the grades the kid doesn’t ride well enough/makes to many mistake horse loses confidence starts stopping instead of taking a step back blame horse/previous rider buy something else pattern repeats

[skydy]

In that case I don’t blame Warrington at all for being tired of it. Putting a child on an experienced horse or a schoolmaster may be fine in some disciplines but Eventing at the Preliminary level is not one of them. It takes time to develop the strength, to achieve the finesse and timing of the aides and to acquire the muscle memory to ride at that level safely.

I’m not saying that some young people can’t achieve that, but they do need to prove that they are very capable riders before they are allowed to compete at the Preliminary level.

[Jealoushe]

Yes, but it’s more an attitude towards the sport thing between riders I find. People wanting to upgrade to be able to say they’re riding the “green numbers”. It’s almost a mindset that you aren’t the real deal until you do. So everyone is in a race to get there.

[skydy]

Best that they are required to slow it down then, and put in the time required to ride safely.

[Gardenhorse]

The data they have presented do not show whether an unlicensed rider/horse with 8 MERs as a combination has a statistically lower chance of a fall than a rider/horse with 6 MERs or than a rider and horse each with 8 total MERs but only half as a combination. That’s what I’m asking for.

I want to see the data and statistics related to the specific requirements for unlicensed riders that are being proposed.

The fact that they aren’t sharing that data is what makes me wonder whether they have actually done more detailed analyses or if they just came up with the number of MERs (originally 10, now reduced to 8) mostly arbitrarily.

Similarly the fact that a member of the safety committee that came up with these requirements doesn’t know (or apparently care) how the decision was made to require them all as a combination makes me wonder whether there is data underlying that decision or if it is also mostly arbitrary.

I want the sport to be safer, but I’m a scientist so I also want to see the data and the analysis that are being used to make decisions.

[Gardenhorse]

I agree with you. I think nervous is different than terrified, and I think wanting a horse that you can count on to not get over-anxious in the start box or bolt with you on XC is different from a horse that is expected to do essentially all the work of getting around the course because the rider is going to be frozen in fear the whole time.

However I do also wonder if the ads are exaggerating the terrified state of the riders just to avoid getting a bunch of responses of 4 yo OTTBs for sale.

[Blugal]

@Gardenhorse

The data they have presented do not show whether an unlicensed rider/horse with 8 MERs as a combination has a statistically lower chance of a fall than a rider/horse with 6 MERs or than a rider and horse each with 8 total MERs but only half as a combination. That’s what I’m asking for.

I want to see the data and statistics related to the specific requirements for unlicensed riders that are being proposed.

The fact that they aren’t sharing that data is what makes me wonder whether they have actually done more detailed analyses or if they just came up with the number of MERs (originally 10, now reduced to 8) mostly arbitrarily.

Similarly the fact that a member of the safety committee that came up with these requirements doesn’t know (or apparently care) how the decision was made to require them all as a combination makes me wonder whether there is data underlying that decision or if it is also mostly arbitrary.

I want the sport to be safer, but I’m a scientist so I also want to see the data and the analysis that are being used to make decisions.

I couldn’t agree more!

[Thames_Pirate]

I would also be interested to see data from places where qualitative controls are in place (like I said, I know Germany requires licensing through judged performances in testing situations and in competition). We can also look at the number of competitions combinations do in other places and perhaps look at safety data to see if there really is a correlation. Of course, that depends on other countries tracking the data effectively and being willing to share it, so coordination via the FEI or just across national federations would be a good step. I am still of the opinion that a qualitative control is needed and more effective than a quantitative one.

My first MERs with my prior horse were enough to qualify for Prelim back then, but I in no way was or felt ready to go Prelim. I had been at an eventing barn through Novice, moved, and had a regular coach for jumping and did regular clinics and XC schooling with the jump coach and friends–enough for up to Training (and I did that move-up to T on my own). Had I moved up then based solely on my own desire to do so, the 4, 6, or 8 number would not necessarily have been all that critical. It just would have affected my timeline a bit.

Later, I had another horse and was in much more consistent training. Both the horse and the training were sufficiently improved to put Prelim on my radar. We had a targeted move up. And in the two months before it, we hit some snags. My coach straight up told me she wasn’t supportive of a move up just yet as some holes had emerged, and I fully agreed. Again, I was fully qualified at the time–years at T, lots of MERs on two different horses, some successes at T. I was close to the 8 MERs and could have gotten them easily enough with a budget push. But the coach saw holes (and I am not ego-driven enough to dispute her assessment; the holes, while small, were there), and while we probably could have gotten around, it wouldn’t have been a safe, confident ride. Again, the QUALITATIVE assessment was critical, particularly for someone who has no experience at Prelim. Again, I am not ambitious enough to be blinded to my faults, but psychology tells us that we all can tend to overestimate our own competence. External eyes are a better assessment.

I do think the combination rule is excessive, and I do think 8 is more realistic than 10 for many people in areas with fewer and further between events. There needs to be a better mechanism for controlling move ups. The data tells us that. But sheer numbers is not necessarily the answer.

Finally, I think making the requirements more stringent is not the only solution to ongoing safety concerns. I know that fence technology is a big one, but we also need to look at ways we build the systems from the ground up–grassroots efforts at the lower levels to improve skills, etc.–as well as effects of decisions made at the top that trickle down. Moving toward a more professional sport or a more inclusive sport, access to training and venues and education, etc. are all critical components of these conversations.

[JenJ]

@McGurk

I didn’t read the ads you saw, so I am going on just your representations here. If these ads are for a horse going Training or Prelim, well, then, yes, that is scary. The rider needs to have their head in the game and be making decisions as soon as they leave the start box, maybe before. There’s no such thing as a Prelim packer, IMO.

However, if we’re talking about your average ammy owner with a full time job, whose doing Intro or Beginner Novice a couple of times a year as their schedule allows, your comments make less sense to me. There’s a whole underrepresented group of riders who simply don’t get enough saddle time to go beyond Novice who still pay their dues and support the sport. If they need a steady Eddie to get out of the start box and around safely, how is that different that someone needing a packer for the 2’6" local division or to foxhunt second or third flight?

If your point is that you shoudn’t be going Prelim when you need a seeing eye dog to get around Training or Novice, point taken!

If your point is that your average AA going Intro or BN shouldn’t be in the sport at all because of nerves or the need of a packer to get them around, I think you are very much mistaken, and that you are attacking the foundation of the sport.

I may be mistaken but I do not think Jealoushe’s comments were directed at the BN type person, who is happy to stay at that level for life.
A safe, schoolmaster, packer is perfect for an ammy who loves eventing despite being scared, and wants to enjoy Intro / BN and has no ambitions to go further.

Personally, not being as brave, strong, competent (and possibly stupid) as I was 20+ yrs ago, I see myself looking for that sort of horse in 10 years, if I want to continue enjoying the sport.

[evtrmom]

I’m all for slowing things down and the need for appropriate scores for levels consistantly across the board. I have witnessed some very bad riding at the Training and prelim levels. In my opinion (which is only from years of watching) and feel some young riders are “bought” levels with expensive upper level horses, doesn’t always make them better riders, just masks problems as they move up quickly. The riding needs to be better, and if that slows moving up the levels then so be it. I also feel the cost of horses plays into this. Horses with extensive records at novice start at $30K. So these horses are moved up the levels just to put a higher price tag on them while they are still young and resellable. I think this is not being talked about at all, the cost of horses, which is a factor in all of this IMO.

[gardenie]

Exactly. Why? I watch the warm up for xc green as grass and maiden and beginner novice, and it is by and large ugly. Next to no one is riding in a plain soft bit and working on good rhythm to the fences. Insofar as those ads, if people want a bicycle, they should get one. I know all about nerves in front of folks, it is a tough situation, however, if you are doing it at home, and things are going well, you can work on show nerves. But if you are scared all the time, why are you going to get on a horse and your nervous system sits right over that horses spine, and then you want the HORSE to be perfect.

[RainWeasley]

The thing with statistics is at some point you have to figure out how to use them. In real world applications, often the numbers you decide on have to come from good judgment and are basically educated guesses. Like my engineering job, when a part on a helicopter rotor system is scratched or dinged, we have to look at the data we have and decide on the number of hours that part can be flown before needing replacement without breaking and bringing down the whole helicopter. You can’t really get an exact answer from the resources we have, so it ends up being a really conservative guess. When lives are on the line, more conservative is better, though walking the line between conservative enough but not wasteful can be difficult.

[ABookworm]

I’ll be honest here that I don’t have a ton of eventing experience as I started before the pandemic and have just run one starter (2’) schooling event. But I have no desire to go beyond Novice, and maybe try Training with the right horse. My background is Saddleseat as a child to Hunters for 5 or so years.

Personally, after volunteering consistently I think there does need to be more slowing down in terms of moving up. There are plenty of riders I see who don’t seem entirely in control on XC and seem to be gunning to make time without worrying about the in between fences portions. I may not have as much knowledge as others on this board but the last thing I ever want to see is an accident that could have been prevented through more experience and/or schooling. It kills me when I see local riders moving up quickly, on green horses, because they want to be taken seriously in the sport and viewed as someone who can create their own horse. I would love to see less emphasis on moving up and more emphasis on perfecting the riding at the lower levels. To me, a well trained BN rider is just as enjoyable to watch as an upper level rider.

To throw myself under the bus, I know that after my one starter event I needed to slow down and school more before attempting another as my mare and I are a good pair in the SJ ring, dressage and schooling XC, but stringing together a full XC course felt a little rougher than it should have been to me. We made it through intact and with a clear jump but towards the end I was almost relying on her, because I got tired, which should never have happened. So now, we’re back to playing in the SJ arena at schooling shows, dressage shows to work on that score, and schooling XC with a trainer who is helping build my strength/endurance and helping me learn more about proper riding in between fences.