Menu

Stay in Touch
Sign up for ENews
Subscribe Now

Unlimited access >

Menu

2022 New Rules Proposed - MERs Required to Move Up

Eventing
#142

EN just published another piece, this one from a YR. YR is out of touch with reality imo.

Kids are worried they won’t make it to the level in time for YR, it means kids going that level will have to be starting earlier to get the experience younger so by the time they are going Prelim they are the right age. I think it’s better if kids start eventing younger, and better if the kids who discover Eventing at 17 can’t go intermediate a year or two later.

I know of someone who went T and bought a 4* horse to do Prelim. Got the horse home and they can’t ride it. It’s way too much horse. Took the T horse and tried to do P (wasn’t a P horse). Ended in a fall. 2 years later they’ve now slapped a double bridle on 4* horse in hopes it can complete a dressage test so they can event it and go for YR. This person has a somewhat high profile coach. Anyone can see it’s a bad accident to happen but yet, it’s going to go ahead and event I’m sure.

8 Likes
#143

yep, all of this. And the issue is not just with juniors. I want to know the checks and balances with entering an event. Why can’t an electronic program be implemented that checks your record before you are able to complete an entry? I witnessed an AA over the weekend riding really poorly at T. I looked up her record and it’s horrible, she should not be going T (IMO) I’m not a judge or an official, but looking at the record after her riding got me thinking. If a rider isn;t working with a trainer, who stops her from entering an event? Someone to say, hey maybe you should drop down to Novice? IDK, it’s a difficult issue for sure with how to manage all of this.

4 Likes
#144

This is such a great post. I want to see this data too, not only because I’d like to see the rule supported, but because I am one of those riders. It’s important for me to know how I can mitigate my risk personally.

For example, if there is a big drop-off in fall numbers after 8 MERs, they might choose to use that for the rule. If there is another big drop-off in fall numbers after 12 MERs, I might look at myself and my mare and decide that we’ve got plenty of time and my risk tolerance is such that I want to wait and get 12 even though I only “need” 8 and maybe we feel ready at 10. Information is power.

15 Likes
#145

Still find it very interesting not a single pro that has been vocal about this MER adjustment proposal has mentioned the course and or types of fences asked of T/P+ these days… Or asked for any sort of study on falls and fence types.

I mean, it’s kind of important considering IDK, the USEA claims they are trying to prevent rider/horse falls (subsequently deaths) – um, hello – these falls and wrecks are only happening at specific types of fences.

DW’s piece didn’t do much to sell me on the new proposal. Still think there’s a lot of data missing here… No proof at all that 8+ or even 10+ makes you more qualified or less likely to fall or die during the event.

14 Likes
#146

I didn’t read it that way. I read it that he did not agree with that particular component, and did not choose to report the arguments he did not agree with.

1 Like
#147

I also found it interesting that Warrington mentioned level creep (that P isn’t what it was even 5 years ago) in his interview about the MER changes as one rationale for the change.

6 Likes
#148

Very interesting wasn’t it. I mentioned level creep on many surveys on events in Ontario and the result was more difficult combos at the events the following year :joy: So you can imagine how well that was received.

5 Likes
#149

I have a problem with the “rolling 8 year” part of this rule, too. I’m not able to afford a “string.” I have only one upper level (P+) horse at any time.

I will be 37 this year. I did my first prelim at age 17, with Mack, a horse I brought on myself. I had about 6 trainings under my belt from a previous horse, all MERs. Mack and I did 4 recognized Training HTs before successfully moving up to Preliminary. I achieved 13 MERs at prelim with him, and a handful of 20 penalties, including two long format CCIs.

My second horse was Articat. She did her first novice in April 2004; three Training level events in June, August, and September; and her first prelim at the end of September 2004. All MERs. She was GOOD on xc. She did 13 clear prelims/1* in her career, 14 MERs at Intermediate/2* (plus 5 with 20s), and three MERs at Advanced (plus one 20). 52 total events from 2004-2012.

From those two horses, I have 26 MERs at prelim, 14 at Intermediate, and 3 at Advanced. But that was all more than 8 years ago, so that experience doesn’t count… really??

Third horse, All Aboard. I can’t access his USEA record, but from memory I think he only did about four recognized Trainings (maybe just 3). He did several other unrecognized events, though. First Prelim in March 2015. Achieved 3 MERs, plus one with 20, and went to P3D in Oct 2015 where he won on his dressage score. Did one more prelim, and moved up to Intermediate in Feb 2016. Had a couple 20s, but achieved 3 MERs at Intermediate plus MER at CIC2*. Qualified for Richland CCI2* in 2016, where he again won on his dressage score. Had another two or three intermediates on his record and was nearly ready for advanced when he tragically died of a cardiac event on intermediate XC at River Glen in 2017.

Assuming my memory is correct, that gives me about 6 more MERs at prelim, and 7 or 8 MERs at Intermediate.

Since 2018, I only have 2 MERs at Prelim with my current horse.

Lifetime about 40 MERs at prelim, 22 at Intermediate, and 3 Advanced. I’m not Phillip Dutton, but I’m not the 17-yo kid moving up to Prelim for the first time, either.

The new rule makes me an unlicensed rider, and mandates that I must go recognized Training level 8 times on every horse to move up. Despite my record of having brought along 4 horses on my own, moving them up safely and successfully. If a horse needs 8 runs (or 20) I’ll take as long as he needs; but I prefer to get those miles and experience cheaply through local unrecognized events (at recognized venues!) or by schooling competition courses after the show.

BTW, the last fall on my record was 2009, with Articat when she left a leg at a hanging log in torrential mud at Fair Hill CCI2*. I had four total falls on her (one was SJ) in 53 starts. I had one fall in 25 starts with Mack…and that was because he landed in a hole in dropping into water. I don’t know the true number but I have perhaps 130 recognized starts (at all levels) and 45 more unrecognized in my career. And 5 falls lifetime at shows.

Again, I have not fallen off in competition in the past 12 years. I have a successful record taking multiple horses from novice to Prelim and beyond. I’ve ridden long format and up to Advanced.

But I’m not good enough to know if a horse is ready to move up without 8 MERs at Training? I’m a safety hazard and a threat to the sport and need rules to protect me? I know I’m not the only one in this boat, and there must be a better way to weed out the dangerous riders. I fully support a licensing rule, testing by a licensed official or ICP instructor, another set of eyes on a rider prior to move up.

34 Likes
#150

Did you respond to the survey with this info? I’m wondering if an appeal or something like that can be made on case by case basis for people like yourself that obviously has experience? Maybe reducing the Trainings to 4? IDK, this is not an easy discussion by any means.

#151

I can understand the frustration. I wrote a post earlier about my personal frustration with the costs of even local HJ shows. Requiring someone to compete 10x a year isn’t feasible for most people. There will be many people in regions that will no longer be able to hope to make to to Prelim and that is really a bummer. BUT no one is entitled to move up in levels and compete in a FEI competition just because they really want to. It doesn’t mean you can’t school at that level, maybe attend a clinic at that level, or show up to a jumper show and jump that height. You just don’t get to show up to a recognized event until you have proven, without a shadow of a doubt, that you can keep it together competing at the lower level. It doesn’t matter if you really really want it. It will be a devastating blow to some young professionals in more remote areas that hope to move up. But it doesn’t mean you can’t be a professional and that you can’t have students competing at the lower levels. You just can’t go prelim necessarily. Likely this will keep some teenager from getting a broken neck that should have been held back by a trainer.

It will be In some ways this levels the playing ground. You can’t just buy a super horse and make it around by the skin of your teeth a couple of times, pull a bunch of rails and then move up because you had enough $$ in your budget to buy an upper level mount. People will have to earn it a little more.

2 Likes
#152

I remember a Rolex with an 18 year old rider, who completed and did well, and still thinking, "That’s crazy! "

#153

BadEventer had an interesting perspective, she’s competed Prelim (or above) 70 plus times on different horses but still needed 6 MERs atTraining to compete a new horse at Prelim while someone who had NEVER GONE Prelim only needed 8. Seems wrong.

She pointed out how a professional who has 25 MER at Intermediate is not effected by this rule.

6 Likes
#154

What if they did something like X amount of MERS total and at least 4 (or whatever) need to be on the horse you are moving up with?

5 Likes
#155

I think that’s the current rule?

#157

I tapped the delete button on accident, meant to edit. I thought it was just 4 MERs on a horse, no requirements for more? I haven’t tried to go prelim so I have no idea. What exactly IS the current rule then?

1 Like
#158

Current rule is the RIDER must have 4 MERs at T level (lifetime, I think) before moving up to P. Any rider established at P can take any horse P. And it used to happen, back in the day, that Bruce would debut a horse at Prelim its first time out.(Though it had probably hunted a season or two, and prelim was more straightforward then. )

For a T3D, rider and horse must have 4 MERs at T level, unless rider is established at prelim, then horse only needs 2 trainings.

#159

Ok thanks. So yeah, require 8 for a rider, with at least 4 for the horse they are moving up on, one within an 8 week period of the prelim. Then maybe 4 for any horse after to move up as well. The first time around you would still have to get 8 MERs on the same horse but it wouldn’t be as bad for any horses after. Or something like that.

1 Like
#160

I am going to take the unpopular position that I like these new rules. I don’t necessarily like the 8 MER’S as a pair in a rolling eight-year period but I have a feeling that will be tweaked over time.

Up until this last year I was an area 7 as an amateur and both volunteered and competed at a couple events a year. I never went above novice because of my show nerves. I even came off Area 7 championships at novice level with my coach telling me I needed another year at novice before move up. I completely respected that coach’s opinion because I knew I wasn’t ready to move up to training. Having watched multiple riders at all levels while jump judging on cross-country across area 7 events at the beginning middle and end of the season I feel these rules are a good idea. I saw dangerous riding by amateurs and some professionals because they were gunning for the win without the education behind it.

One huge difference in between the West Coast and East Coast riders I have personally seen is West Coast riders just don’t have the same opportunities that East Coast riders have. In Oregon and Washington I only knew of one hunt club. in Oregon and Washington the season is incredibly short. In Oregon and Washington the number of schooling locations with prelim and above questions are tiny compared to what I’ve seen out east. At the lower levels and through the lower upper levels amateur riders are just not as educated as I feel like they need to be.

Now I’m a professional due to my job in Area 3 but I’m on the very edge of area 3. Most of our events are 3 to 5 hours away and I have to also contend with my daily job and finding coverage for while I’m showing. Do I anticipate moving up to preliminary in the next three to four years? Probably not. But I’ve never ridden at that level and I want to be fully educated and my horse fully educated before we attempt. That’ll mean strategically planning my schoolings, lessons, and horse shows so that I don’t run the legs off of my horse and I have wiggle room if a mistake happens.

Will it be hard? Yes. Will I utilize every modified I can get my hands on when I get to that level? Yes. Will it be potentially expensive? Yes but every sport is expensive. If it was easy then everyone would be doing it. Every horse would be doing it. Preliminary is a big level jump from training and the statistics (though only presented at the simplest level) show that fall rates greatly increase at that move up stage.

2 Likes
#161

I’m late to the conversation and don’t really have a dog in this fight, but I just read Danny Warrington’s interview and have some thoughts I want to yell at the wind:

I am supportive of the intention, maybe even more so after reading DW’s interview. I completely agree more education is a good thing. I don’t think the education of competition can be replaced with XC schoolings, clinics, or lessons. You need to be in those truly “do or die” situations sometimes for education to occur (oof, bad choice of idioms but I’m rolling with it). Having grown up in Chester County and having some experience with the upper level riders of the past, I agree it was different when people were out hunting on a regular basis: that was a much better analog than what many riders have today in the “suburban” environments where we are all forced to live and train our horses.

I think the assertion that prelim is an internationally recognized pro level is an important one: if you are going to play at the pro levels, you better darn well be ready for the commitment.

But having lived in Chester County/area 2 yet also having lived in the remote reaches of area 3 and then places out west where I didn’t even try to compete, there is definitely a regionalist tone to everything about this. I felt like what DW wasn’t saying was an implication that people who are serious about moving up should just go somewhere (like the east coast) where they can get their MERs. Well that’s great if you are a 19 yo working student or independently wealthy, but not a feasibility for the working amateur with a family. I hate how regionalized horse sports have become thanks to the popularity of “snowbirding” in the south. What was once a luxury is now practically mandatory for anyone who wants to be competitive. But it has removed resources and competitions from other areas. I will also argue it can promote bad horsemanship in the wrong circumstances with the ability for continuous competition. Luckily most people have better sense than that. But the rule change could potentially exacerbate this trend, because I certainly don’t see people stepping up to reinstate recognized competitions in more remote areas.

Which brings me to my last reaction: the time limit to attain the MERs. As an educator, I know learning happens on different time lines. As a horse person, I know horses laugh at our best laid plans. So why set a firm 2 year time limit? DW said something about how if you run out of time and miss the MERs for prelim with your older horse, then just start your next horse younger. That made me bristle on multiple levels. Many of us are lucky to be able to afford a single competition horse; we don’t have endless strings of prospects like the pros. I understand there has to be some sacrifice if you want to ride at a pro level and I understand this sport is expensive. But I don’t think the rules should be written with the implication that horses are commodities to be used up and replaced the suit the rider’s agenda, which is how the statement read to me. Isn’t horsemanship central to all we do? It feels like we are rewarding those who burn through horses in 2 years for the sake of competition and making it tougher for a true horseman of lesser means.

So overall, I’m :100: supportive of the intention of this change. But I would love to see more perspective and inclusion in the wording and execution to account for those who aren’t east coast-based or maintaining a string of pro-level prospects.

18 Likes
#162

I think most of us are supportive of the intention of the change. We all want more safety and better educated riders at all levels.

I will keep up this refrain: We need qualitative, not just quantitative, methods for assessing readiness to move up. Having a coach who doesn’t feel the pressure of moving people up too quickly can provide this, but you need the right coach who is willing to tell you (or parents) “no.”

We need a way to accommodate EventerAJ and others who have miles at Prelim and above or for those with lots of miles at T who don’t want to pound older schoolmasters over years just to move up when they are ready. We need ways to accommodate those with regional and financial limitations–the amateur with only one horse. On the flip side, the 4 MERs is easily attainable and not enough of a safeguard, and frankly, the competition miles are important. So the goal is finding a way to ensure people get enough miles AND are truly ready without strangling opportunities.

Without a way to track results at schooling events or to ensure their courses are up to the standard required for quality miles, it’s hard to figure out how to count those miles, but at the same time these are invaluable. We often used the local pair of one-days to test readiness for move up for the big event hosted by the venue. Their courses were softer than their recognised one, but still run over the same basic course, so they were a good gauge of readiness or of identifying holes in the training. But they weren’t the same as running a recognised event and should not have counted as MERs. So they were essentially “useless” miles in terms of qualifications. Requiring tons of MERs would cause many riders to save their money on these educational schooling events so they can get in one more run at a recognised event and would ultimately kill off schooling events like these. That would be counterproductive.

I am guessing there are pros on here who might be able to weigh in: How would you feel about signing off on clients before they move up? Not to be held liable (unless too many of your students were struggling/falling/DR), but just to say you reasonably thought they were ready to handle the next level? Assessing that should be part of ICP training, right? If an ICP instructor of the appropriate level signed off on a student’s readiness in conjunction with enough MERs, would that be a good option? I am not a pro, so maybe this is an insane idea or has flaws I hadn’t considered. But hey, throw it out there, right?

And has anyone considered judged XC rides as I suggested earlier? Thoughts?

7 Likes

Get your Digital Subscription here - only $21.95 / year

Subscribe here
See gift options

Sign up to our monthly newsletter!

By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.

Copyright © 2023 The Chronicle of the Horse