Question: If a horse is eliminated at 2 FEI 1* events and one Preliminary Event within a 12 month period, and is supposed to lose qualifications at the highest level, why did we get an email stating that the horse lost qualifications at the Prelim level? Wouldn’t it be at the 1* level? Or are both lumped together when doing the loss of qualifications?
Loss of qualifications is actually a lot more complicated than it appears on the surface. I don’t know the exact details of the situation but I will give it a guess.
First you should know there are two different layers to losing qualification. Youcan lose qualifications through the USEF, or the FEI or both. FEI looks only at FEI results; USEF looks at both.
Usually it takes 3 results to lose qualifications, but if you do badly at two FEI in a row (remember, FEI looks ONLY at their shows, so it doesn’t matter if you do a national run in between), then you can fall afoul of them. For the situation you describe, it sounds like they were not two FEI in a row.
So USEF looks at 1* and Prelim results to determine loss of qualification for Prelim; for their re-qualification purposes, 1* is the same level as a Prelim and is not a level higher. Intermediate or 2* would be considered the next level. Therefore, the 3 bad results at 1* and Prelim would lose your qualification at Prelim, since that is the level the USEF controls. However, another bad 1* in that 12 month period (rolling from the date of the first bad 1* result) would then cause you to lose your 1* qualification.
In other words…it’s super complicated due to the mixing of the federations. Check out this link and see if it helps at all.
http://eventingnation.com/the-elephant-in-the-room-reverse-qualifications/
Interesting. So they could still do a 1*, but not prelim?
That’s what it sounds like, they’ve lost the qualification from USEF, but not FEI.
It was actually two 1*'s in a row (rider falls), and that resulted in reverse qualifications with FEI. We did have it confirmed with USEA that the 1* and Prelim are treated the same, so she must have 2 MERs at Training before moving back up. Definitely a good thing in my opinion (it’s my daughter), as I think they need it to build confidence again. Horse is perfectly capable, just needs some solid runs before moving up again, so it’s really for the best.
3 Likes
No. If you lose it at your national level…you can’t run at FEI. What qualifications your national federation set are on top of FEI. For example, for a US rider to run a CIC1*, they have to have a certain number of national results at Prelim to qualify as first required by the FEI and then as required by the USEF. I actually am not sure there are any requirements for the 1* level at the FEI but there are at the next levels. But if you are from a different country (even if competing in the US), what rules govern whether you can run the CIC1* are set by your national federation (and whatever is required by the FEI)…some countries only require what the FEI requires but the US for example requires more then the FEI.
Sorry, I wasn’t totally clear on that point. BFNE is right, if you lose it for Prelim via USEF, you also won’t be permitted to run a 1*. Both USEF and FEI have control over who enters a 1*, so you need approval from both federations. For Prelim, FEI doesn’t care, so only USEF regulates who can enter a Prelim. If USEF takes away your qualifications, then you can’t enter anything they consider ‘Prelim’, which is Prelim and 1*. If FEI takes them away, you can enter Prelims but not 1*.
After seeing more detail from the OP, it looks like this rider has lost both sets of qualifications; she lost USEF via three in one year (one Prelim and two 1*) and lost the FEI qualifications through the two 1* being two in a row. BFNE is totally right about the 1* level being a little funny; for both initial qualification and re-qualification, they leave it up to the national federations to set qualification requirements. For 2* and up, there’s a very clear path provided for qualifications and re-qualifications.
Well, not very clear, but specific and laid out in the rules. It’s just complicated to follow sometimes! :lol:
Okay, thanks for clarifying, much helpful!
How complicated :ambivalence:
