Disappointed with eventing performance

[vineyridge]

Y’all Keep saying that the eventing in the Olympics is a CCIO3* officially. I cannot find that statement anywhere in any official document. Please send me to your sources. There are no definite specifications in the Rules that distinguish a CCIO3* from a CCI 3* that I can find. I’m still looking, though.

Quite frankly, I do believe it was probably a very difficult 3* course that was given an FEI exception so it could be called a 4* and come within their stated rules. There may have been one 1.45 meter brush jump for the same reason. But the RULES say the course should be of 4* difficulty, which doesn’t quite jibe with an official description as a CCIO3*.

FEI is very good at making rules and then providing exceptions for them when it wants to.

[Lynnwood]

[QUOTE=Bayhawk;6491312]

Now lets move on and learn from one another to become better as a whole.[/QUOTE]

The best thing that has been said the entire thread !

[Renascence]

:)I did not forsee that:)

[omare]

I think the qualifications are referring to “maximun number of jumping efforts” not minumum number.

[Lynnwood]

So what I gather out of this is that it would be tremendously important for there to be a Registry that is TB specific that those of us who do believe they are equally important as sport horses to be able to track , measure and quantify them on a whole.

Suggestions on how to or which etc?

[vineyridge]

No. The number of jumping efforts for a 4* is 42-45. Period. The number for a 3* is 38-40. Unless, of course, the course is given an exception to have fewer.

I’ve been delving in the rules again. A CCIO is a completely different beast from a Championship. 4* Championships are WEG/OG, per the rules. The Europeans are a 3* Championship, but the difficulty is determined for each one by the FEI and the host Organizing Committee. A CCIO must have at least five international teams with each allowed six horses. Home country can have an unlimited number of horses and athletes. CCIOs max out at 3*.

Eventing at the Olympic Games or at the World Championships is
equivalent to two CCIOs.

Their rules are about as clear as mud and full of conflicts.

[omare]

well if maximum means minimum I would agree it is as clear as mud.

[Bayhawk]

[QUOTE=vineyridge;6491451]
No. The number of jumping efforts for a 4* is 42-45. Period. The number for a 3* is 38-40. Unless, of course, the course is given an exception to have fewer.

I’ve been delving in the rules again. A CCIO is a completely different beast from a Championship. 4* Championships are WEG/OG, per the rules. The Europeans are a 3* Championship, but the difficulty is determined for each one by the FEI and the host Organizing Committee. A CCIO must have at least five international teams with each allowed six horses. Home country can have an unlimited number of horses and athletes. CCIOs max out at 3*.

Their rules are about as clear as mud and full of conflicts.[/QUOTE]

Not to start another train wreck with you but your assessment is NOW exactly correct. Why didn’t you do this research before you told me to shut up , exclaimed I didn’t know crap about the sport and INSISTED this was a 4* Olympics ?

I knew what I was talking about the whole time…why do you think I fought you so hard ? Didn’t you wonder ?

I will admit that I had also verified it with the President of the German FN. He happens to be a good friend of mine but I wasn’t going to tell you that. Now you have learned how to gain your own knowledge and therefore you now know what you are speaking to. This is a good thing !

[vineyridge]

Bayhawk, the Rules say it is to be conducted at a 4* level of difficulty. The rules say that the WEG/OG are 4s in several places. I believed that the FEI would abide by its own rules. A CCI3 is by definition not a 4* level of difficulty.

[Bayhawk]

[QUOTE=vineyridge;6491840]
Bayhawk, the Rules say it is to be conducted at a 4* level of difficulty. The rules say that the WEG/OG are 4s in several places. I believed that the FEI would abide by its own rules. A CCI3 is by definition not a 4* level of difficulty.[/QUOTE]

I’m done with this Viney. You can’t see the forrest for the trees. You can imagine the Olympics to be at whatever difficulty your little heart desires.

The Olympics in London were a CCIO3* according to ALL in sport who are not Viney from Mississippi.

At some point , you will have to step from behind the computer , get your nose out of a book and immerse yourself in the world of equine sport. When you do , then and only then will you learn. Have fun with that. I will not respond to this nonsense again.

[omare]

well at least we dont think there are 5* events- --the next extreme sport.

[vineyridge]

Whatever kind of course it was, it certainly did a good job of letting the very best horses rise to the occasion. If more than a quarter of the starting field didn’t manage to get around XC, it was certainly hard enough for the horses who were sent there.

But…if the Olympics are 'internationally accepted" as being only a 3*, then they aren’t worth the emphasis that people seem to put on them. They aren’t the pinnacle of the sport. You send 4* horses to a 3* competition and they will almost certainly do better than the 3* horses. Maybe the Olympics should be limited to horses who have never completed a 4* to make them fair.

[Lynnwood]

[QUOTE=Bayhawk;6491909]
I’m done with this Viney. You can’t see the forrest for the trees. You can imagine the Olympics to be at whatever difficulty your little heart desires.

The Olympics in London were a CCIO3* according to ALL in sport who are not Viney from Mississippi.

At some point , you will have to step from behind the computer , get your nose out of a book and immerse yourself in the world of equine sport. When you do , then and only then will you learn. Have fun with that. I will not respond to this nonsense again.[/QUOTE]

Bay I don’t think she was trying to be contradictory. If my reading comprehension is on part tonight I believe she was saying. That her belief in what level * the course was ; was in fact because that is how it is presented in the FEI’s own projected rules. One would assume they who set the guildlines would in fact follow them.

I believe at this point she knows that for whatever reason the course designer did not design a 4* course.

I can understand the disconnect on both your parts. Bay you were going on what LG stated the course was and Viney was basing her opinion on what the rules said the course should have been. Both parties assuming that their frame of reference would be correct.

First off being condescending and haughty even in the face of facts/vs opinion argument is not going to get us anywhere. Last I checked we all are on the same side of the line in the sand being breeders in the US wanting to breed top sport horses for our chosen disciplines.

Second Viney does bring up a good point. If the Olympics asks course designers to create courses that are not 4* and on par with the current level of difficulty in the sport then it is an easy assumption that horses used to going around at the 4* level could potentially walk all over a 3* course and the rest of the competitors who’s Apex is 3*.

It is going to come across terribly, but do they dumb down(for lack of better wording) dressage and show jumping as well for nations that don’t have top programs ? Last I checked the answer was no? So if they are going to there has to be some sort of check and balance put in place.

[grayarabpony]

In Atlanta – yes 16 years ago and a long format away – several very experienced horses and riders successful at 4* level had problems with the xcountry course. Ian Stark and Stanwick Ghost, Marie Christine Duroy and Yarlands Summersong, Vicky Latta and Broadcast News, William Fox-Pitt and Cosmopolitan II, and Mary King and King William. Barcelona (with the heat) was very difficult and I don’t remember Sydney being a cakewalk either.

http://www.fei.org/disciplines/officials-organisers/organisers/eventing/dressage-tests. Click on the link for the Olympics.

Lynwood why do you think they’re dumbing down the dressage? The test is a 4* test.

[Lynnwood]

[QUOTE=grayarabpony;6492234]
In Atlanta – yes 16 years ago and a long format away – several very experienced horses and riders successful at 4* level had problems with the xcountry course. Ian Stark and Stanwick Ghost, Marie Christine Duroy and Yarlands Summersong, Vicky Latta and Broadcast News, William Fox-Pitt and Cosmopolitan II, and Mary King and King William. Barcelona (with the heat) was very difficult and I don’t remember Sydney being a cakewalk either.

http://www.fei.org/disciplines/officials-organisers/organisers/eventing/dressage-tests. Click on the link for the Olympics.

Lynwood why do you think they’re dumbing down the dressage? The test is a 4* test.[/QUOTE]

Read again Gray I said “are”? they also lowering the sport level for dressage and show jumping “?” since they did so to XCourntry. It was a rhetorical question. Meaning NO they did not so why one vs the other.

Suggesting that allowing the XCountry course to be designed at the 3* level to allow for “whatever” their reasoning is would imply that the rest should be affected as well as a matter of fact all facets of the equestrian venues should have had allowances then for countries without the same means to train.

What is the saying Run with the big dogs or stay on the porch. Lessening the difficulty of any of the facets does not give a true result.

[DownYonder]

[QUOTE=vineyridge;6492136]
But…if the Olympics are 'internationally accepted" as being only a 3*, then they aren’t worth the emphasis that people seem to put on them. They aren’t the pinnacle of the sport. You send 4* horses to a 3* competition and they will almost certainly do better than the 3* horses. Maybe the Olympics should be limited to horses who have never completed a 4* to make them fair.[/QUOTE]

Stepping into this fray to say that I doubt too many people familiar with eventing have any illusions about the Olympics being the pinnacle of sport. Yet they like the concept of representing their nation and competing for an Olympic medal.

To compare, look at basketball. The U.S. men’s team is made up of pro players who make MILLIONS of dollars every year playing their sport. They know the Olympics are not the pinnacle of their sport, yet they are happy and proud to represent the U.S. and are thrilled to have a chance to win an Olympic medal.

Competing at the Olympics is the dream of every athlete from childhood - a chance at fame and glory, and respect for yourself, and respect from your countrymen.

[RyTimMick]

@vineyridge;6492136

Whatever kind of course it was, it certainly did a good job of letting the very best horses rise to the occasion. If more than a quarter of the starting field didn’t manage to get around XC, it was certainly hard enough for the horses who were sent there.

But…if the Olympics are 'internationally accepted" as being only a 3*, then they aren’t worth the emphasis that people seem to put on them. They aren’t the pinnacle of the sport. You send 4* horses to a 3* competition and they will almost certainly do better than the 3* horses. Maybe the Olympics should be limited to horses who have never completed a 4* to make them fair.

I think this only applies to eventing, as the highest level of the sport are not as easily attended. The venues don’t exist everywhere. You can not say this about a Dressage ring, or a show jumping fence. However, I will use Phillip Duttons horse. He has only competed at 3* events all year. Mystery Whisper has most of his experience at this level. I believe it is kind of like preparing for a marathon. You don’t practice 26miles…you practice at half that. However, if you have never competed at 4* you can hardly expect to place the first time you do.

Tim

[grayarabpony]

[QUOTE=Lynnwood;6492271]
Read again Gray I said “are”? they also lowering the sport level for dressage and show jumping “?” since they did so to XCourntry. It was a rhetorical question. Meaning NO they did not so why one vs the other.

Suggesting that allowing the XCountry course to be designed at the 3* level to allow for “whatever” their reasoning is would imply that the rest should be affected as well as a matter of fact all facets of the equestrian venues should have had allowances then for countries without the same means to train.

What is the saying Run with the big dogs or stay on the porch. Lessening the difficulty of any of the facets does not give a true result.[/QUOTE]

Sorry I misread your post, it was late. Thought you were referring to eventing dressage and SJ at the time. I guess you completely missed my point about eventing in the other Olympic games though.

I don’t know why you think the course was a 3*. Less jumping efforts but 4* size fences and difficulty is not a 3*. A difference of a 7-8" spread on a solid obstacle is not insignificant. Say it with me: the course is a special Olympic format of a 4* difficulty. Those are the FEI rules and there currently isn’t any proof that the FEI rules were not followed. BFNE was correct in stating that there are easier options for less experienced riders. Bayhawk, being a bully doesn’t make you correct.

If this post makes somebody mad I don’t care.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odv_d6LJcnY

[Equine_Reproduction]

[QUOTE=DownYonder;6492440]
Stepping into this fray to say that I doubt too many people familiar with eventing have any illusions about the Olympics being the pinnacle of sport. Yet they like the concept of representing their nation and competing for an Olympic medal.

To compare, look at basketball. The U.S. men’s team is made up of pro players who make MILLIONS of dollars every year playing their sport. They know the Olympics are not the pinnacle of their sport, yet they are happy and proud to represent the U.S. and are thrilled to have a chance to win an Olympic medal.

Competing at the Olympics is the dream of every athlete from childhood - a chance at fame and glory, and respect for yourself, and respect from your countrymen.[/QUOTE]

Mmm…I think DownYonder’s post pretty much nails it. I remember YEARS ago when they were discussing Eventing at the Olympics, the “behind the scenes” prognosis was to NOT make it a typical 4* event because so many eyes were upon it and the concern was for the negative press that could come about should any of the horses be injured going over some of those x-country fences and with so many people from all over the world watching. Like it or not, it “is” a valid concern. I remember the same statements being made about the Sydney Olympic x-country course not being “up to snuff” or a 4* course. It is what it is. It’s a venue to represent the U.S.and judging by all the discussions with regards to the Olympic riders not being U.S. riders and horses not being U.S. horses in the equestrian events…well - quite honestly, we’re not doing a very good job representing our country anyway <rolling eyes>. I dunno about the rest of you breeders here, but if I thought I had the horse that “could” represent our country, I’d be MORE than happy to put it under a U.S. rider that could take it all the way (emphasis being on U.S. rider). Forget having the rider having to figure out how to buy the horse.

[Home_Again_Farm]

@Equine Reproduction;6492664

I dunno about the rest of you breeders here, but if I thought I had the horse that “could” represent our country, I’d be MORE than happy to put it under a U.S. rider that could take it all the way (emphasis being on U.S. rider). Forget having the rider having to figure out how to buy the horse.

:yes::yes::yes: I would. The horse would not be a show jumper or an event horse, but I think any serious breeder’s dream is to get one of their’s to the highest level, either nationally or internationally. I can dream, anyway. :winkgrin: