[QUOTE=JER;7573922]
Badminton changes direction every year. Next year, Hunstman’s Close will be near the beginning, the Lake more towards the end.
I find a lot of this discussion quite incongruous with what I saw and heard this weekend. Unlike in previous years, the riders seemed positive about the course and satisfied that their concerns were heard (as with 18b). It’s not as if they were calling for Hugh Thomas’s head on a plate, as they were in 1999, when Badminton was a swampy mess complete with swimming horses and riders. That year, 73 horses started XC and 29 finished. Long format, too, with much of the attrition coming on steeplechase. A number of riders continued on after falls to complete – which I think would have happened this weekend if it was still allowed under the rules.
Eventing is an outdoor sport. Weather is always going to be a factor. Horses are quite capable of dealing with less-than-perfect conditions. (The only rider who completed two horses this weekend, Izzy Taylor, comes from a strong hunting background.) The OT is for ideal conditions; if conditions are other-than-perfect, you adjust accordingly.
Mary King’s ride drew lots of gasps from the crowd, starting before the bank incident. The horse was not going well. Mary did not look very in sync with him. I was hoping she’d retire after the bank. Then I was hoping they’d stay upright at the Vicarage Vee. When the stop happened, my friend and I were saying out loud ‘Please go home.’ It was hard to watch, and I wouldn’t blame it on the course design. And I say this as a huge fan of Mary King.[/QUOTE]
I think riders are keeping their horses a little less fit to be more competitive in the dressage. That would for sure catch you out on a course like this one. Particularly some of the hotter TB’s, which could explain why some of them had trouble with fitness on Saturday. It could also be that some of the less scopier horses were caught out because of the footing.
As for the perception of people like JP60, I think some newcomers who have really only been around during teh short format, feel that the dressage leader has a right to remain ahead if he’s at least an average xc horse and are up in arms if xc is hard. Or feel that optimum time should be doable even in bad weather. If you’ve watched some of the rides, most the horses that finished well looked pretty good all around. Even the horses that retired looked good until they got tired. Very few horses looked like they were having a hard go the whole way.
As for optimum time, in situations where there’s a weather component, I almost think it’s safer to keep optimum time as is and thus unatainable because I feel like riders are more likely to make better decisions as to pace if “making the time” is removed as an option.
Given that the course designer has been clear that he was aiming for a real Badminton and the weather couldn’t have been completely unexpected given it’s England in May, I would have hoped riders would have had their horses extra fit. I really commend those whose horses weren’t fit enough for retiring when appropriate, even though it was a selection trial for WEG for many countries. That’s horsemanship.
The solution to all of this to stop rewarding lower dressage scores once you hit 65%. Start the penalties there. That will eliminate some of the incentive for people to shortchange fitness in an attempt to keep contact with the dressage leaders. They keep tinkering with the xc, the heart of the sport, when the solution is in right there in day 1. Do we really care that one eventer scores a 65% and the other an 80% in the dressage? Is that really what eventing should be about? A 65% is a good score in dressage and takes a horse with good gaits with a good rider. That horse should be the standard against which the others are judged.
