Returning your Olympic hopeful to the owners

With the caveat that we have no way of knowing the accuracy of the article posted above. Given the way it presents the story, it’s probably heavily flawed.

As I understand the article, that is not what Laura said. She said the horse would not be ready for Paris 2024. As I read the article, she didn’t say anything about readiness years from now in 2028.

Remember that the owner wasn’t going to bring the horse home until the end of 2024, once Laura said “no Paris”. It was Laura that is sending him back now. Per the article.

So was the owner was no longer interested in 2028? Or maybe the owner decided that the horse could point for 2028 but didn’t need to be with Laura for that entire time?

It’s unclear from the article. Who decided what, first. Who triggered who, or was it the reverse. The chicken or the egg question. Meaning that this discussion is of hypotheticals, as we don’t know what exactly happened in this case.

If she doesn’t yet, there may be a good chance that she will have soon. Doubtless she can find someone, even if it raises eyebrows among the dressage cognoscenti.

1 Like

Interesting scenario, sounds plausible. The one point is that, after the decision (Laura’s) to skip Paris 2024, it seems that the owner then decided on a year of Laura-rides during 2024, and bring him home at the end of 2024.

I can fully understand that Laura has only so much ride time available, for training competition horses that need more ride time than most other horse sports. Even with assistants helping with rides at certain points – at the end, they aren’t Laura.

Given the long trajectory of elite dressage training, it would make sense that she’s dedicating her time to horses that at least are on track for 2028, knowing that no horse is a sure thing. If the horse isn’t on that track, it is taking up time that should go to one that is.

That is the correct strategy for highest achievement. Have several eggs in the basket and when the time comes, take the one that is the most ready.

But I wonder, was the owner was thinking that she would send the horse back to Laura at some future point? Maybe that was when Laura decided that this isn’t going to work. That was never her plan.

Sounds like the lady wanted her horse in an Olympics. Why wait on 2028 if the horse can go in 2024? Go to 2024, then bring him home, then maybe think about 2028. I get that. Except that it was too much pressure on the horse for a good showing in 2024, and I get that, too.

What are reasonable expectations of owners? What do riders need to insist on to achieve the goals of both? Which owners can accommodate those needs, financially and otherwise?

I think this is a struggle in every sport where wealthy backers are key to athletic achievement.

3 Likes

Again, the horse has not done a national GP or a CDI at GP. It is unlikely able to contend for a team spot with all the seasoned horses that have been purchased for other riders. The chances of this very green horse to make the Olympic team in 2024 are slim to none. I doubt there is any rider who has a shot at the Olympics with this horse, not even our country’s best riders (which includes Laura G). So I doubt the owners are doing that. I just don’t understand why Laura wouldn’t keep him through to the end of the year unless she had a co-op deal with the owners (meaning she tossed in her training for them tossing in the upkeep and paying show fees)…She could open up the stall for a paying client then. Just speculation, but whatever.

6 Likes

All that true. And yet there is a major disconnect with what the owner seems to be saying, and perhaps assuming.

“They” got a grant to try to qualify the horse for Paris 2024. (I take it that the owner who was paying the bills benefitted most from the grant.)

Wondering why The Dressage Foundation would offer a grant with a horse not up to the level. But I know nothing about the organization.

Did it seem realistic to Laura then, but over the next few months it became apparent to Laura that the horse wouldn’t progress sufficiently on that timeline?

The way it reads (must caveat that we don’t know how accurate the article is), Laura was (probably) always thinking of 2028, not 2024. But the owner became sighted in on Paris 2024, and for her 2028 came off the table. But comments in this thread are that the horse was never a realistic candidate for Paris. In that context, the owner comes across as having unrealistic expectations.

Graves explained that, "when the relationship began, it was planned to last through Los Angeles 2028.

In the late summer of 2023, we accepted a grant from The Dressage Foundation in hopes of qualifying for Paris 2024.

A few months later the owners of Sensation FOD made me aware of their intention to bring him home ‘after Paris’."

That reads as if the owner was assuming the horse would compete in Paris and so have an Olympics on its record in 2024. So, Olympic goal achieved in 2024, done, bring him home. And/or maybe, if the horse wasn’t selected for Paris, the project ends anyway because 2028 is years away, so never mind, he comes home.

Laura is also quoted as saying …

"… As time passed and the final qualifying procedures were published, I felt in my heart that it would be too much pressure, in the time allowed for Sensation FOD to gain the confidence needed for this level.

In complete fairness to Sensation FOD, his owners, US Equestrian, The Dressage Foundation and all of the donors, it was decided to send him back to his owners now."

The owner says …

Owner Carol McPhee explained on Facebook that, "we have 100% trusted and supported all of Laura’s decisions while developing Sen and understand he’s not ready. (…). The decision made in Mid-November [2023] to bring him home end of 2024 was just for that reason. Sen was not pushed or asked to be pushed in any way (…) All of FOD horses are micro-managed with care. We don’t push and we listen to our horses."

Maybe it all comes down to what has been said upthread … the owner can financially get behind some expensive horses, training and competitions, but is quirky, maybe not so realistic, and inclined to unexpectedly change course. That’s almost the only way this chain of events makes sense. As it was reported in this confusing article.

6 Likes

So what happens to the grant? Does it have to be paid back?

No. There are 3 $25k grants that the foundation makes available for FEI/High Performance Riders or Horses. They are to help our riders/horses be more competitive internationally - ie to help pay for training, and certain related expenses.
Here is the grant Laura received.

https://www.dressagefoundation.org/grants-and-programs/apply/high_performance_dressage/lavell-prize.html

Though there are a bunch of criteria, here is the one that is relevant: Be a rider whose horse teammate has the potential to grow and succeed Internationally.

4 Likes

Ok so Laura got it it didn’t go to the owners. That’s good , I’m sure she will put it to good use

1 Like

The Dressage Foundation grant pushed the timeline up by four years, with 2024 Paris becoming the new goal. Then the owners told Laura a few months after receiving the grant that they were going to bring him home after Paris instead of continuing with the original plan to aim at Los Angeles.

I dont think the grant itself pushed up the time line as there are no specific requirements she had to meet and in fact the money could be used over a 2 year period. IMO its not even about the money - these are business people, with money. They started with an 8 year window knowing what the expenses (roughly) would be.
Personally I think something soured in the relationship - are they “blaming” her for not getting the job done? Something else- maybe like the horse is really nice but not quite Olympic caliber? Maybe the horse isn’t 100%? who knows but pretty sure there is more to the story.

12 Likes

Given the one criteria above “horse teammate” : If she hasn’t used all the money, she may forfeit the rest as she no longer has the horse. on the other hand if she has some other fancy prospect maybe not.

Having read online stories about
the timeline/past training of this horse, I think you’re correct that
there have been “bobbles” or maybe mild injuries that prompted LG to not want to push or hurry the training and
owners being relative newbies
w/ money but not high level horse experience, owners did not understand the long game.

5 Likes

Good points. I also wonder how other horses and clients factored in to the decision. I know LG has several up and coming horses and didn’t one of her sponsors just secure two new top quality horses for her? I don’t know if any of them are likely prospects for Paris but if so, then it is possible that Sensation’s owners felt as though they and their horse were being pushed to the back burner. That kind of scenario happens pretty frequently, where a trainer has a “#1” horse to ride and compete, but if another client brings her an even better horse, the previous #1 horse and client are no longer at the top of the echelon - and that can result in hurt feelings and even resentment. Not saying that is necessarily what happened in this instance but it is apparent the McPhee’s and Laura no longer saw eye to eye on the horse’s abilities and progress.

I am also thinking that perhaps Laura didn’t want to go to Paris with a horse she was unsure of. The article refers to her saying the horse needed time to build his confidence in the ring and I can see where she may not have wanted to risk the possibility of the horse having a meltdown at a crucial moment - not only embarrassing herself but also letting down her team.

4 Likes

Not sure what other horses she has in training, though one of my fellow boarders has a horse with her - maybe 6ish or 7. Its been at least 18 months and the horse has never been shown or off the property. Its been this or that, I dont push for info. But it raises a question in my mind.
Sensation is the ONLY horse she’s shown since she took the ride in 2020, with maybe a 1 show exception of a 3rd level horse. I’ve seen her at WEC and so some first hand knowledge. other info on USDF So the McPhee’s were certainly the top of Laura’s list.
BTW, it is Adrienne Lyle that just got TWO new FEI horses.

4 Likes

Ah, right. Sorry for the confusion!

2 Likes

I’m not a person that believes trainers should push horses into showing and showing at higher levels to satisfy owners, but that is ridiculous if true.

4 Likes

usdf scores…

4 Likes

Smart riders identify their proposed rides in advance and sell ownership shares to their supporters, whilst keeping a share for themselves. (With contracts of course.)

This article has a little more detail. It looks like the owners were aiming for Paris.

2 Likes

An owner who doesn’t understand the system, and a trainer who hasn’t communicated such an understanding although not necessarily their fault, are not a new issue in equestrian sport.

A couple of bad breakup stories …

Does anyone remember the story of HJ Hampton “Henny”, promising elite-level eventer brought up the ranks by Peter Atkins? The long-running drama was followed closely on COTH if anyone can find threads.

Atkins was/is an Australian eventer based in the U.S. Henny was originally purchased by the aunt of one of Atkin’s lesson students for her neice to ride about 2006-2007 (I think). But Peter saw talent, and Henny ended up in training with Peter for progress up the eventing levels. Peter felt the horse was legit for targeting the Australian Olympic team (at the time in some disarray), and he was getting positive feedback from team connections.

Atkins was a SM pioneer among eventers, promoting Henny. He was one of the first riders to go viral on youtube with a helmet cam of a cross-country run in competition. He showed the power of SM to attract positive attention.

Peter was paying all of the horse’s expenses, and I think was a half-owner in return. The owner, not an eventer or a sophisticated horse person, and not someone who had ever considered such a project, was going along with Peter as he progressed Henny up the levels. The goal was that at some point Henny would be sold as a 5* (then 4*) horse for a very high value, and she would share in the proceeds. I am not sure if there was a written contract more than some emails, and maybe a handwritten-on-notebook-paper variety.

But somewhere along the line the owner began to feel completely over her head and out of place, as she was attending the KY 3-Day and other elite competitions. She became convinced that Peter would sell the horse and cut her out. So one night she ‘kidnapped’ Henny from Peter’s barn and disappeared with him. Massive legal situation, question of her right to take the horse as she was essentially a 50% co-owner, Henny’s location – and quality of care – unknown, and weeks to get the horse returned to Peter’s care.

Henny was finally returned to his home barn and care routine with Atkins. But by then he was out-of-shape and soon in a serious colic that he barely survived.

Many more legal documents and a court appearance or two later, the Atkins family bought the co-owner’s share of Henny, to stay with them as both a family pet and a competition horse for Peter. At a price set by a judge.

In the aftermath there were questions among the gp about the completeness of Henny’s recovery, although eventually he did return to competition with Atkins.

But the dream of the Olympics, and a high-dollar sale, was over. For the co-owner as well as for Atkins.

At least Sensation FOD didn’t have a journey like Henny’s. There are other such tales out there in the wilds. It happens.

5 Likes

SenSation FOD has facebook page. This is what the owner wrote two days ago:

YES - Sen is home with me! I’m very thankful for all Laura has done.
NO - I don’t need a rider for him - I will finally get to enjoy my horse.

6 Likes

She changes her comments about the owner, from what was published in the other article …

“I know the McPhees will continue to take the very best care of him and I wish them the best time enjoying their very talented horse.”

1 Like