Getting more entries at Kentucky 5*

[FitToBeTied]

It seems to me over the years the number of entries have fallen off for the 5* at Kentucky. I haven’t done research but when we attended in the early 2000’s, the 5* XC ran all day. Now it is about a 3 hour event. When XC started this weekend I believe there were 36 horses running from the 51 that originally entered. But even if 51 ran that would be a modest field. With only 36 going there are only enough entries to allow you to watch one horse over each fence.

Why do they have so few entries? So what do people think can be done to increase the number of entries?

[WNT]

Well, I would rather see a smaller highly competent field running than a larger one that may have more questionably prepared pairs. You’ll also always have some attrition do to various causes and re-routing.

As far as deepening that highly competent field, I don’t know. There are currently only so many riders and horses in the country at that level. We’ll always get a small international contingent, which seems to depend on what championships are running in a given year.

Better financial support for up-and-coming riders to get the quality horses to the level, with the training they need. Better support for American breeders to create horses that don’t need an overseas shopping trip and shipping costs. There are some fantastic riders that only can afford to keep one horse going, and something fairly minor can derail plans with nothing to back them up.

[FLeventer]

I think adding in the Maryland 5* is taking a few from the field. Some that may wait for a bit more experience for the fall 5* versus pushing for Kentucky when it was was the only one in NA.

When it was just one NA 5* you kind of had riders who were like well I would like to get one in the season or I have to wait till next year, so there were some that would push for Kentucky. Heard this discussion a few times.

Also this isn’t a championship year besides the PanAm games which the US scored their qualifications for in Italy. So they won’t need the heavy hitters for too ensure Olympic qualifications. Without a championship, then it seems like more of a development year or an experience year of running overseas or maybe shoring up some things so the horse can come out next year to impress for Paris.

I also wonder with the COVID years of some horses missed out on competition due to covid and just are not quite ready versus if they had that full 2020 season under their belt and it is kind of catching up pipeline wise.

The 4* short being added is awesome, gives some of the horses a good taste of the electric atmosphere where they may not quite be ready for the 5* yet but a fall 5* will be in the plans after running the 4* short and then a 4* long in the spring.

Also seeing a lot of riders do overseas options in the past 5 plus years, which I think is great. Amazing supporters and owners that are making the ability to travel an option for them.

[Benchmark]

@WNT

Well, I would rather see a smaller highly competent field running than a larger one that may have more questionably prepared pairs.

100% agree with this. It would be great to have 70 pairs who were actually prepared to run at this level; however, that’s just not the case and I don’t necessarily think that’s a bad thing. In the past, we saw a lot of inexperienced riders who entered Kentucky vastly underprepared and without a real idea of what they were getting themselves into. That inevitably led to some very rough, often scary rounds.

I think you still see that to a degree at Badminton and Burghley. The one area of eventing I do think the US has figured out relative to the UK is that “just close your eyes and kick” isn’t acceptable at 5*.

[Highflyer1]

It seems like the entries have been way down at Pau and Luhlmelon as well.

[Jealoushe]

COVID? Two years lost for horses who were developing and coming up. 2 years for older campaigners to sit out and miss their final chance? Plus Worlds and the Olympics.

I suspect numbers will go up over the next few years thanks to the 4*.

[emeraldcity]

I’m sure some are running the 4* who might have historically entered the 5* just to get out in the atmosphere. I don’t think it’s bad for horses or riders to have that option.

[Mander]

@Benchmark

I think you still see that to a degree at Badminton and Burghley. The one area of eventing I do think the US has figured out relative to the UK is that “just close your eyes and kick” isn’t acceptable at 5*.

I remember watching one of those (I don’t remember which one) for the first time maybe 6-7 years ago and I was caught by surprise by exactly this. There were several pairs I thought were, at the very least, a bit out of their league and could have used some more preparation. There was one pair I remember in particular though that had absolutely no business being on course. They weren’t even 2/3 of the way through XC (which I had already been watching through my fingers) and horse and rider were very obviously exhausted - I thought for sure they were going to be pulled up for dangerous riding. They weren’t.

Even the commentators had a pretty “business as usual” attitude about it all, cheering the guy on and chuckling every time his poor mare scrambled her way out of each bad spot

[Texarkana]

I’ve been mulling over this a lot for a few years now.

I’m torn on the topic. I have a lot of thoughts.

Foremost, it’s better a small field of capable riders than a large field of unprepared riders.

People want to “blame” Maryland for the decreased entries, but I disagree. Badminton isn’t any less popular because of Burghley or vice versa. To get riders to the top, you need opportunity to reach the top.

I think as we have progressed with the short format over the past couple decades, it has whittled away at entries. You have to be so darn good to ride a five star course anymore. They are so technical. Plus with tighter MERs, you have less room for mistakes.

Then you have all the normal economic horse forces at play: horses and competition are getting so expensive, people have less access to horses, etc.

I was unpacking boxes a few months ago and found a 2002 Fair Hill International program. There were so many entrants! I know that is the next level down, but still, it was shocking to see how many more horses there were competing at advanced just 21 years ago. It was alarming to me because it was the first time I fully appreciated how many competitors we have lost.

But going back to my first statement: I’d rather a small, capable field than a larger one of potentially hazardous combinations.

[enjoytheride]

Back in 2019 the FEI changed the star system and created a 5*. I don’t feel we have fewer entries as KY used to just have the single division. It now has the 4* entries and the 5* entries.

[Texarkana]

@enjoytheride

We used to not have the 4* and 5* it used to be just the single entry. I think that is a large part of the reason.

I feel like this year is the first year that the 4 star “took” a lot of entries from the 5 star in the sense that there were numerous horses who stepped down.

But, is that a bad thing?

I’d rather people opt for the 4 star than stretch themselves or their horse for the 5 star and potentially have a fall.

[enjoytheride]

I mean, the 4* is still pretty beefy so I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

[Texarkana]

@enjoytheride

I mean, the 4* is still pretty beefy so I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

I agree. I think adding it was a smart move. It’s still quite a spectator event.

[Texarkana]

Also, 5 star = the old 4 star level.

They didn’t “create” a higher level when they changed the stars. Current 5 stars are the old 4 stars, current 4 stars are the old 3 stars, and so on down the list.

The new level they added that shifted the stars is the current one star, which is a beefy modified course. There was no FEI category for that low level prior to the shift.

[Bonnie2]

FYI, 2002 was still with steeplechase.

[Texarkana]

@Bonnie2

FYI, 2002 was still with steeplechase.

Yes, I thought that was implied and understood.

[Arzny]

In my opinion, eventing is losing competitors to other sports. There are so many people who I knew when I was grooming FEI event horses who are now doing the jumpers or pure dressage - including my old boss. Be it safety, horse power, the time commitment, they all have their own reasons. I rarely see the switch the other way, that is, jumperland to eventing. And you certainly don’t see pros switch sports to eventing.

These are international competitors we are losing. Plus the potential int’l competitors we lose, as they steer their clients towards the hunters & jumpers and not eventing.

I went to bop around a few BN events last year with my chicken s*** jumper to try to make him braver. Honestly, it solidified my decision to stay in jumperland.

[Jealoushe]

Numbers of riders in events has steadily been increasing though, so it might just be the people you are running into.

Most events have more entries than ever before.

[Arzny]

Very possible that it’s some form on confirmation bias & the select people I hang out with. I’m happy to hear that entries are increasing!

[Texarkana]

I mean, there is practically zero prize money in eventing yet it requires the greatest demands from the rider.

Out of my own curiosity, I went and counted: there were 93 entrants at the 2002 FHI 3 Star (current 4 star). Now, those are program entries- I don’t know how many actually started and certainly don’t remember.

This year’s Kentucky only had 59 starters spread throughout both the 4 and 5 star.

I might have miscounted this, but there were about 74 different riders in 2002. About half those riders I know are still involved in eventing or know what they are doing now. The other half I am unfamiliar with by name.