For whatever it is worth, I read years ago that about 30 horseshoes are picked up from the course at Badminton every year. Shoes are also collected from the course at Rolex KY and etc. Horses lose shoes, especially in an environment like Badminton, and a LOT of horses are out on the course on XC day. That also happens in the Kentucky Derby, and it affects outcomes there as well. Until there is a horseshoe that can’t be lost, it’s one of the jeopardies to the final score. 
Back to the horses … I have to agree with those who find the America fandom commentary on the American riders to be unproductively boresighted on the placing and performance in the one current competition. Even as we remain wrapped around the axle of also-ran teams at WEG and the Olympics.
The real team-building benefit of Badminton and other 4*'s for the U.S. pairs is if horse and rider come away from the course a more confident and able 4* pair. Part of confidence-building is a horse feeling it was not over-faced or over-exhausted. We all know that those two problems have the potential create long-standing issues, thus degrading the potential for a future team.
There is a lot of ground for the U.S. to make up in fielding a podium-contender WEG team in only a year. Over the past many years this is where we chronically seem to be positioned, re team-building. Even though I personally think we have a greater number of very promising pairs at the top of the U.S. sport than we have had in many years, and yet the best of them are still not what we need to fight for a spot on the podium if WEG were running this summer.
And this is where this concept of ‘respect’ for opinions and input may be breaking down the inability of the U.S. to develop a better team, from one WEG/Olympics to the next. Like others who comment, I can’t begin to tell anyone how to ride the London bank at Badminton. But many of the opinionaters have something important to add in terms of things other than riding that are crucial for team development , re universal basics of building up individuals that can make up a future successful team. And, building a cooperative and competent team structure, both among the athletes and the organization.
We’ve got top raw talent in horses and riders, raw talent is NOT the problem. The problem is our skills in team development, starting with developing the talent over the long term. So that we have a continuous pipeline of successful pairs for team selection, as do the other nations who are the usual faces on the podium at WEG and the Olympics.
And, the development has to be done with the type of resources that we have available in the U.S., not some ideal European model that we don’t have. Or, just accept our lack of access to better instruction and training at earlier stages of development, as well as multiple annual 4*'s for a much larger base of riders, and therefore adopt more modest priorities and goals suitable to less-adequate resources. Especially the necessary limitations of competing in Europe to give far more riders and horses more 4* experience.
Finding people to blame, boring down on individual riders, is no help. Finding a better team development model is what is needed. And I think there have been significant improvements in the last 8 to 10 years, it just hasn’t been spread widely enough. We do have more resources and more pairs that are better prepared. Just not nearly enough pairs that can go top-3 against Jung, Todd, Klimke, etc.
Did Veronica come away from Badminton a more confident and able 4* horse, capable of a more competitive future performance? If the answer is yes, then Lauren did her job. Did Lauren add to her own skillset that will make her an even better rider over 4*'s to come? Did the two of them cross the finish line with a new experience that will make them even more competitive in the future as a pair? The same question holds for each of the American pairs - how did the Badminton experience improve the horse and the rider, both individually and as a pair, as part of the pool of the best pairs for team selection? Re team-building, that is really all that matters at this point in time.
How different the team-building perspective is for some of the other countries. Country teams can only choose four, and certain have more than that who would also comprise a credible gold-medal contender team, thanks to the country’s organized team-development skills, as has been discussed at length on this board. They aren’t running on good fortune or fairy-tale careers, but on a system that works. Clearly the U.S. is not at that rank, in international team eventing, at this point in time. The real topic is not the micro-view of picking apart each performance, but the macro view of how much the Badminton experience improved the pairs for future team selection.
And I’ve mentioned this before … part of team-building in this day and age is coaching BNR’s who may be in the team selection pool in how to handle today’s news and social media. Someone has recognized this as both HSB and EW came out with quickly-released, but still carefully crafted statements, just after they got the heaviest early criticism. I doubt either of them handled that on their own. The public needs some images to believe in and follow and there are methods of creating and sustaining those images that are well-honed and available. These days it seems to be as important to being a team candidate as the riding, and that can’t be wished away.
I think DOC made a very good effort at more professional team management. I think he did add team-based coaching to the U.S. riders at Badminton. But throughout his career as coach, he needed far more cooperation than he got from both the team organization and the individual riders. He was not able to define his role as he needed to do. That’s how I read his story. I expect him to bring his professional approach to FEI safety and I wish him the best in that role - knowing that won’t be easy, either, with some of the same shortcomings in organizational cooperation.
