Does eventing need a three-tiered system of classifying events?

[Molly_Sorge]

Doug Payne blogged for the Chronicle today about some ideas he has to improve the sport–namely, to provide a tiered system of events at the C, B and A levels.

“As I see it, without financial rewards for a good performance, our owners and riders will continue to have a very difficult time maintaining horses long enough to produce them to the international levels. Our riders will also continue to have a massive challenge in their search for additional partners and owners to back the superstar horses of tomorrow. If not for the love of the sport and the personal rapport with the rider, most rational people would not own an event horse,” Doug writes.

Read it all here… http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/eventing-needs-new-bones-under-facelift

What do you think of Doug’s ideas?

[RAyers]

I read the article and I give him props for advocating a “new idea”. Yes, professional looking out for a professional and his pocket book. No real interest in maintaining the sport. He is just adding to the same lies told to justify the short format. He is advocating a h/j business model which marginalizes the amateur for the glory and riches of professionals.

This business model doesn’t work in the h/j industry. Look at your responses on the h/j forum about the hunters.

My real opinion, he and his idea can go pound sand.

Reed

[bornfreenowexpensive]

Interesting ideas…I guess I’m unsure why it needs to be organized as such though. We already have unsanctioned events run in many locations. More prize money at some events would be nice but I worry that it does change the sport.

When prize money is on the line, I worry that more riders will make bad decisions. It may also bring in the wrong type of owners…ones who care more about winning than developing the horse as Doug put it.

I think the issue is more that people are making a living off the sport…and therefore that IS really changing the sport. It IS very expensive to develop a horse up to the International levels with a pro riding it. I make a very good living…and I was unable to do it without syndication. That really says something.

But to get my own horse (with me riding) up to those same levels—the cost is substantially less (although the time much longer). That also says something to me.

I’m one who really doesn’t want to see this sport go the direction of the H/J model. I’ve been in that world and LEFT it for a reason. I worry though that eventing is already heading down that path. When I go to events now…rather then there just being a handful of pros–the majority of the competitiors have a string of horses and are pros. And now…adding prize money…that just changes the dynamics in a way that I personally don’t like even if I do win a check.

[Couture_TB]

I don’t even know where to start. So since I don’t have much time before working horses, I will just say NO. Leave the sport as is, or better yet why don’t they go back to the long format with more fences like the 80’s and 90s.

[VCT]

Uh, wow… that was weird.

There already are “C-class” events. Unrecognized and mini-trials. Luckily for me there is a whole series of “minis” nearby and most are held at venues that also hold recognized events.

It seems to me that this class system pretty much already exists with…

C: minis and unrecognized
B: regular recognized horse trials (some do have prize money)
and A: large “destination” type events (Rolex, Fair Hill, Richland, Red Hills, etc)

I guess the only difference is that right now you may not win a bunch of money at some.

I’m not sure if prize money is a good idea or not, but I don’t think eventing needs a huge overhaul in structure in order to have prize money.

I have always liked Doug Payne’s helmet camera videos and thought he seemed like a down to earth, nice guy. This article unfortunately showed that he is very out of touch with the riding/eventing world for the non-elite.

[FrittSkritt]

[QUOTE=bornfreenowexpensive;7482094]

When prize money is on the line, I worry that more riders will make bad decisions. [/QUOTE]

Especially with the ludicrous “mandatory” order (D/SJ/XC) that CICs must be run in now. Running XC last (and skipping a jog) isn’t good for horses’ welfare, nor does it help the “spectator sport” aspect that eventing is trying to cater to — “awards ceremony,” anyone?

Dropping a rail won’t kill your horse, gunning for time and crashing at the last fence will. (I don’t understand why no one’s stood up to the FEI and demanded why it can’t just be up to the discretion of the organizer! :mad:)

[west5]

We basically already have “A/B” and “C” events as I would categorize sanctioned and unsanctioned. I’ve ridden at both and they each serve their purpose.

I don’t really understand the need to classify events A, B and C. I read the article twice in an effort to comprehend what truly distinguishes the three and as far as I could tell it was only prize money.

I love the sport. I also happen to think Doug is an incredible rider. I would love nothing more than to win powerball and be an owner of one of his horses. Seriously, what fun!

I do not see any possible business model that truly supports upper level pros campaigning their horses. If commercial/retail sponsors want to donate big bucks for prize money that is great but I see no need for further categorization.

I’ve sat on several six figure hunters, been to WEF and competed at HITS. That scene has a place in the equestrian world. It would, however, break my heart to see eventing follow down that same path.

[LisaB]

The sport isn’t working. What he’s advocating is to have all these unrecognized events be a simpler less regulated event but the usea still gets a little bit of cash. The entry fees for me to get back into an event prevent me from ever possibly affording it for the next few years. We had a kid, went to a single income, and moved west. There’s one small venue here that does a little but I was shocked at the entry fees for the little events here in AZ. And they HAVE to have all these fees tacked on if they are to be recognized. It’s extremely cost prohibitive for someone like me now. Then to offer money at the A class events? Why not? It might help my instructor be more affordable in the long run if she can actually recoup her funds for an event. Don’t get why his plan is so bad.

[Divine_Comedy]

I don’t really understand what he’s proposing. The levels he describes are already there: unrecognized, recognized, and basically the Adequan Gold Cup Series plus a few others. Why do they need to be officially called A, B, and C?

[live2jump74]

I think that there is merit to his claim. It’s merely a way of creating an organized system to our events. I am currently an amateur and have also ridden professionally and I compete in both the H/J world and in eventing. Not every system is perfect but having a rating system will assist in keeping costs low for everyone who wants to enter a “C” level event. The system does work to a point in the H/J world because I can go to a “C” rated show for cheap and get horses exposure but then go to an “A” to earn some money in the jumper ring. There isn’t anything wrong with developing a more organized rating to our events. And yes – I come from the long format era. Short format is here to stay whether everyone likes it or not.

[flutie1]

Sorry Doug. Your idea is hardly original! The issues you raised have been hashed and rehashed at the Committee level for years. Sounds interesting on paper, is difficult to implement when you get down to the nitty gritty of rating. Based purely on cash offered is easy. Black and white. When quality evaluation comes in, it gets dicey.
I understood that PRO when it came about was set up to do just what Doug wanted. Make it possible to earn a living by eventing. How has this worked out?

[Divine_Comedy]

[QUOTE=live2jump74;7482193]
I think that there is merit to his claim. It’s merely a way of creating an organized system to our events. I am currently an amateur and have also ridden professionally and I compete in both the H/J world and in eventing. Not every system is perfect but having a rating system will assist in keeping costs low for everyone who wants to enter a “C” level event. The system does work to a point in the H/J world because I can go to a “C” rated show for cheap and get horses exposure but then go to an “A” to earn some money in the jumper ring. There isn’t anything wrong with developing a more organized rating to our events. And yes – I come from the long format era. Short format is here to stay whether everyone likes it or not.[/QUOTE]

But how exactly does having an official rating system assist in keeping costs lower? The cheap “C” unrecognized events are already cheap, the “B” recognized events are already somewhere in the middle, and the “A” events are more expensive already. Having an official rating to me just says someone has to get paid to go to these venues and verify their rating.

I can go to an unrecognized show for cheap to get the horse exposure and then compete him recognized when I think he might be ready to step up. When I think he might win, I’ll take him to the ‘destination events’ where he can win prize money.

How exactly will officially labeling the different events save anyone money? These classes already unofficially exist!

[LAZ]

I run schooling shows (CT, Derbies, and HT’s) and organize the Classic Format 3 Days at IEA horse trials. I’ve been a long time member and supporter of eventing–joined the USCTA in 1980, and have had a basically lower level (prelim and below) barn for a whole lotta years. I was awarded a Cornerstone Award from the USEA in 2013. I ran our area’s YR program from 2002-2005, volunteer at some big shows–Pinetop Advanced and Rolex and go to shows around Area VIII, iV, and III so I see how others do things as well.

First off, I’m glad to see the Doug Payne’s of the world getting involved in the sport as more than a competitor. We need the upcoming crew of people to participate in the governance of the sport, they are the future.

I think everyone would like to have prize money at events. I can’t see any downside in it at any level. However, I have no idea how to generate it. I have tried a voluntary pay-in (competitors pay an extra $10/entry) that money goes into a pot & it was divided up into payback 60%first, 30% 2nd, 10% 3rd but very few people participated so I quit doing it.

I’m always interested in (constructive and/or useful) ideas about how to keep people interested in eventing, as such, my business. This ABC plan already exists, without a name, and without a formal structure–my schooling shows are C, recognized are Bs and (essentially) the big shows with CIC’s are A’s. There is a LOT of variation in B’s and C’s, not so much in A’s. I think there should be variations in the B’s and C’s-- so much of what makes an event is not directly under the organizers control–ease of access to traveling in, hotels and restaurants nearby, parking, easy access to aspects of the facility (we can only work with our terrain/site as it dictates). Other things-- easy access to water, wash stalls, etc, area footing, XC footing, easy access to toilets, good food, and then the ever important appropriate jump courses (both in layout and in safe and appropriate jumps). Then you have the pretty/glam factor…

I can’t figure how to create prize money (or payback money) for my events, short of charging an additional $10/entry specifically earmarked for paybacks, and that doesn’t payback very far!

I’d be interested in hearing Doug’s (or anyone’s) proposals on how they want to accomplish/structure/implement this. I would not be adverse to getting my schooling shows recognized by the USEA, but I have no intentions of going full recognized due to all the additional requirements it would put on me.

[Ibex]

To a certain extent, it’s already happened in Canada to Dressage and Eventing. Dressage especially. Equine Canada brought in an A-B-C-D system (Gold-Silver-Bronze-Discovery) that put such a burden on the unrecognized/schooling shows that the province actually created their own dressage tests to be used instead. Ridiculous rules about EC Stewards and judges not being “allowed” to attend an unsanctioned event.

Eventing is divided by levels - Starter to Pre-Training (Novice) are Bronze, Training is Silver, Prelim and up are Gold. This means that someone running around a teeny tiny event needs FOUR memberships, totaling upwards of $180. We have two little unrecognized events locally, one of which is only Dressage and XC - no stadium.

[FLIPPED_HER_HALO]

Perhaps adding a new level between intro and beginner novice would draw in more interested riders and help promote the sport for the amateurs. Offer the lowest levels at a reduced cost as well. This would be great for schooling the young horses as well. It may also keep people from rushing their horses up the ranks before they are really ready. There are so many amateur riders out there that only want to go out and compete for fun, and that would be a huge market to tap into in a format that wouldn’t be daunting to them.

I think overall that would help reduce the facility costs for events. Stabling is generally half as expensive as the entry fee…reducing that would help as well. Or perhaps as prize money for the non-advanced levels make the winners stabling for the show comped or discounted.

I have found in general that expenses wise, the few events we have been to have been cheaper membership/entry wise than going to a rated hunter or jumper show where you have $100+ in extra fees on top of $55+ per class you enter, then stabling, grounds fees, USEF hunter AND jumper memberships etc.

[Blugal]

Pros always say they want to see more prize money. Where do they propose it comes from?

[FitToBeTied]

I think this is very self serving by doug. He wants to make a living from eventing and therefore is interested in more prize money. So where does he see this coming from? At a Rolex type of event you get sponsorships because they know 50,000 people will be seeing their signs and other ads. How does he propose to draw more money into a non-Rolex event?

Also, I think there is far too much sub-division in eventing already, why add more? I have always said that one of the great things about eventing is the ability to take your back yard horse in against the best in the world and see how you do. I don’t know of any other sport that does this. Why would you want to lose it?

[Eventer13]

I think Doug needs to read the current thread on the H/J forums about “How can we improve the hunters?” and see exactly how many people are talking about getting priced-out of the A shows. They, too, also have issues with bringing up young horses without breaking the bank, which is one of the reasons so many horses are imported.

As others have said, I don’t understand how this is different than out current unrecognized, recognized, and well-sponsored recognized events. Other than unrecognized would now be recognized… and that’s going to make them more expensive.

And like many such articles, Doug hasn’t addressed how we are supposed to get prize money for “A” events. If he’s trying to make them more accessible, it better not be by increasing everyone’s entry fees, because as an amateur that is NOT going to fly. I think most organizers would love to offer prize money, but there just isn’t a way to pull that off without getting the competitors to foot the bill.

[pheasantknoll]

Pros always say they want to see more prize money. Where do they propose it comes from?

I like Doug Payne, I really do. BUT . . . . I am tired of people whining about the money. Yes, it is tough to make a living in the sport. If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Doug is lucky to be able to ride great horses everyday and not have to take time out of his schedule to drive to day-care, put meals on the table, work an 8-5 job. This is a hobby for me, I accept my limitations. This is a business for him. I think he should do the same.

As usual, RAYERS is EXACTLY RIGHT. . . . Doug is

advocating a h/j business model which marginalizes the amateur for the glory and riches of professionals.

[Ghazzu]

What Reed said.