[QUOTE=Thames Pirate;8107127]
The biggest question, IMO, is one of how these changes will impact safety. To me the concept of three to a team with no drop score is problematic, as is the idea that one competitor can “make up” time from another. How is this good for horses or riders, particularly if competitor A was a bit slow and competitor C feels the pressure to “make up” that time? Are we now going to see jumper riding in our stadium arena to make up for a slower round? Are times and courses subsequently going to change to favor the jumpers?
We also need to take a serious look at our philosophy and direction for the future. We have a few options:
–Stick with the Olympics at any cost and recognize that this might make our sport unrecognizable–a shadow of its former self.
–Stick with the FEI but not the Olympics and risk the FEI mucking with our sport but having a bit more pull.
–Ditch the FEI entirely and make our own governing body with our own world championships, international rules and competitions, etc.
–Ditch everybody and have a US only sport that we can later re-export (reining is now international, hunters are gaining ground outside the US).
–Split and take two different approaches to the sport (a US version not affiliated with the FEI/Olympic version–so Combined Training vs. Equestrathon or whatever BS name they choose).
Some of the other changes are smoke and mirrors. The name change? Aside from being silly and unpronounceable, the concept is a distraction. It focuses our conversation away from the other controversial postings here.
I don’t necessarily agree with the format of team vs. individual, either, but that’s less of a concern as it is specific to a few competitions and doesn’t impact the rules of the sport at other competitions. I am not naive enough to assume it will never haver a trickle down effect, but at this point there are so many things that are a bigger concern. I also wonder how these changes could affect nations that don’t have qualified teams–should places like India, Belarus, Jamaica, Russia, and Thailand have to send four star riders while teams only send three star riders? However, if a country has three 3 star riders but nobody at four star, should they be able to send a team? I can see the pros and cons each way.
–The bit change has the potential to be a good thing, but the problem is who is making the rules and how. My trust in the FEI, USEF, and USEA is shaky.
–Changing the scoring system only makes it more complicated (not spectator friendly!). The proposed changes also diminish the importance of cross country in the scoring. So we can get the weaker XC riders around with fewer penalties, which means our sport is even MORE at the mercy of dressage scores. If we just want to watch dressage horses do some jumpy stuff, shouldn’t that be a different sport? This is especially true if we keep with the CIC model of show jumping before XC, where riders can run harder without worrying about next-day recovery. I am not opposed to the CIC model as a prep for a CCI, but the new scoring indicates we are moving in that direction. The old formula was 60% XC, 30% dressage, and 10% SJ. The dressage coefficients were designed to keep that balance. This change makes one stop XC barely worse than two rails SJ. So I can again take my jumper, nurse him around a not-four-star XC course, and even if he has a stop, he will have already show jumped well and made up time for my slower competitor in that phase . . . . YIKES!
Turning our sport into a place for rejected jumpers with a modicum of bravery and balance is not what I want. We won’t beat the Germans at their game; we’ll just buy their horses (at a mark up) and continue to have mediocre results on an international stage. The changes in our sport have been and continue to lead us down this path. I, for one, am not a fan. It isn’t worth it. If I had wanted to be a jumper rider, I would be in the jumper ring.
On a related note:
There are many ways we could be more spectator friendly without changing the sport itself. We simply need to look at the events that draw in local spectators–non-horsey folks–and see how they do it. Rebecca Farms and Red Hills reach out to the local community. Why don’t other events do more of this–ads in the local to-do guide/weekly, ads in the local paper, signs, bulletin boards, etc.? Then there is making the event accessible–parking, transportation/shuttles, availability of food, etc. Rebecca sets a big tent up on the hill so spectators can bring a chair or blanket, sit on the hill, and see most of the course from the shade. Food and beverages should be readily available to spectators, as should information on both the sport and the individual competitors in programs. Making it a “day in the country” family outing with options for kiddos. Have a trade fair, bring in pony rides . . . Way easier than changing the rules of the sport for everyone! We didn’t even have to wear lycra with sponsor logos!
We had a family come through stabling (non-FEI) at Rebecca. The kids loved the palomino pony my barn mate was competing, and dad fell in love with coach’s big horse. I took the time to bring him out of the stall so they could meet him more personally. He had a fan club! The family said they would make a point to watch for those two horses and cheer for them–just because we took the time to let them pet a nose or two. We can’t make our sport much cheaper or more accessible for participation, but we CAN be spectator friendly for LOCAL spectators. Those are the folks who might join our ranks at the low levels, bring in business to vendors and visibility to sponsors, and eventually have favorites. Our riders, particularly big names, need to be OUT THERE during events, talking to spectators so that they can develop a fan base of non-eventers. THEN those people will tune in to watch them at Olympics and other things. Watching someone you’ve never heard of is not as fun as rooting for someone who was nice to you at the local horse trial in Atlanta or near San Francisco.
We will never get non-horsey spectators to watch much dressage, and we need to be okay with that.
Okay, long post over.[/QUOTE]
This is brilliant! Bold mine- what a great idea!
:yes:
