I received an email to complete a survey from USEA.
They are asking for feedback on how many events you competed in 2024 & then 2025, and why that number may have changed. Also do you compete recognized vs unrecognized & why.
Very interested to see what changes happens based on this survey (if any…).
Any thoughts? Have you submitted, what did you share with USEA?
When did you get this email? Do you have a link to the survey?
I wonder if it’s being sent out in blasts? My last email from them was yesterday and was an advertisement for Adequan.
It shows in my mailbox as 10:04am cst.
I’ll share here something similar to what I shared in the survey because I actually did the math.
8. What factors influence your decision to attend recognized vs. unrecognized events?
Cost, cost, cost (distance too, but a lot of the unrecognized events I attend are at the same facilities as the recognized, so not as much of a factor). For the same facility, therefore same jumps, and quite possibly the same courses, it is 60% less for me to do an unrecognized event.
Math to back that up (not submitted in the survey):
Recognized: 318/entry, 250/stall = $568
Unrecognized: 150/entry, 50/stall, 25/misc fees = $228
(Same facility, shows 3 weeks apart)
The other thing I noticed though while getting the data to back this, is the omnibus & the fees charged on the online platform did not match (this example uses the fees from the online platform). The online entry platform was more expensive. Starter fee was not noted on the omnibus - which I would assume would be included in the entry when reading the omnibus. The entry was also $25 more than the omnibus listed for the division I chose for this experiment + additional $8 online fee.
Thanks! I checked spam but didn’t see it there. I did fill it out. I’d also be curious to see what changes – if any – come from this.
My feedback centered around the rising cost[s] associated with showing Recognized. I’m in Area 1. Most of our Sanctioned venues run unrecognized show series. My show budget is lean. I can show Unrecognized four to six times for the price of two Recognized shows. At my level one Recognized event averages a $600+ weekend, while an unrecognized averages $200.
While the prestige surrounding finishing Recognized is much higher, the horse doesn’t know the difference. Since I’m not selling horses for a living, the additional expenses associated with competing Recognized don’t benefit me.
One could argue the benefit of sanctioned events is they involve sanctioned officials which brings quality to the courses and judging, but my experience is that it’s the folk behind the booth bringing quality to the venue, not USEA’s Sanctioned designation. My favorite unrecognized venue in Area 1 does not host a Recognized component, and has some of the best judging and tracks in the area.
I’d like to see more focus on giving back to the grassroots; the “buy in” cost is already prohibitively expensive for people just getting into the sport. USEA might be fighting forces out of their control here regarding rising costs everywhere, but they could probably stand to make the entry level of the sport more accessible to its widest player base. $200-250 for Starter/BN on top of membership dues is not exactly ‘entry level’ in terms of costs.
Being involved in show organization, many shows see a higher ROI hosting unrecognized, too. It’s telling when long-standing Sanctioned venues go to an unrecognized format permanently.
I completed the survey too, but I don’t think they collected all the information that they will need to really understand the patterns they are seeing. For example, they did not ask at what level one is competing. That seems like a big factor – unrecognized events are more substitutable for recognized ones at the lower levels. Most unrecognized events near me do not offer modified or higher and have very few entries at training.
Their answer options for event selection criteria omitted some obvious factors like schedule (date of the event), location/travel distance, XC footing, whether dressage is on grass or footing, quality of the warm-up areas, and quality of the courses (which is not the same as ease or difficulty).
They also did a poor job of specifying the answer scale. When both “one day format” and “two day format” are items, they needed to specify whether 1 or 5 is most preferred (vs. most important). I prioritize avoiding two-day shows, so I would say that the format is high priority but in different directions for those two options.
I also wonder if the change in the AEC location and qualifying criteria is a factor this year. If people on the east coast viewed qualifying as a goal in previous years, they may have entered more events in order to qualify (and also attended the AECs as an extra competition). The survey did not collect information to directly test that hypothesis.
Recognized competitions held at the same venues as recognized competitions are of lower cost and comparable quality. For bringing along green horses, the lower cost is more important to me than the pomp and circumstance of a recognized competition. As I have also worked on organizing recognized events, I understand the costs and effort of putting on a recognized event and I do not think that they are over-priced for what they offer. They are priced fairly. Rather, the motivation to compete at unrecognized events stems from their availability at a lower price point and them being sufficient for purposes of putting miles on my green horses. I completely appreciate the money and work that goes into hosting events and I am grateful to everyone willing to host them.
I didn’t receive the survey either.
Wow! I have to say, the stabling part of that is probably the most offensive to me. I kinda understand the entry costing twice as much, but why do the same stalls cost five times as much just because it’s a recognized event?
I’m very fortunate to have many haul-in options. If I had to stable and almost double my costs…
I did it but thought the questions were poorly worded, specifically rating 1-5 for “importance”. For example, I could rate the 1 day schedule and 2 day schedule a 5 for “importance” but without further explanation, what does that mean? A 5 (most important) could be a positive (I love that schedule so prefer those events) or negative (I hate that schedule and therefore avoid at all costs) so what meaningful information will the USEA get from that?
Sounds like they should have hired me to set up their survey! Early in my career, as a research psychologist, I designed my own surveys based on the training I’d had in grad school. When I switched to biostatistics, far too often I was analyzing someone else’s poorly designed survey, for which there hadn’t been a data person involved in the design up front. There are also some commonly used surveys that I encounter as a patient that are just awful (looking at you, Beck Depression Inventory!)
In Area II we lost another venue who will no longer be offering recognized events, just unrecognized. Something will need to be done to help mitigate increased costs of showing recognized. Also the volunteer force is shrinking, events are finding it more and more difficult to find volunteers. Without volunteers it will be hard for events to run. So while people complain about wanting all these improvements, it comes at a cost and that cost is, sadly, the loss of more venues.
Which venue is switching to unrecognized in Area 2?
I filled out the survey and said all the same things everyone else said.
I’m newer to eventing and so far I’ve only showed unrecognized for all the reasons that have been discussed here, but may take the plunge to recognized for the 2026 show season to give qualifying for the AECs a go. It would likely be a one-time shot at a bucket list item and then I’d go back to unrecognized. I don’t care about pomp and circumstance and I was stabled next to an Olympian at my last unrecognized event, so in my area the quality of competition is still quite high.
Or maybe I won’t try at all, if I run the numbers and don’t have the extra money. My budget spreadsheet does not lie, much as I wish it would…
I heard that Olney Farm will no longer run recognized horse trials, the one a few weeks ago was their last one. Will just be running unrecognized next year and so on. I’ve heard grumblings from some organizers about how USEF approves dates which also may factor into things. I think Denis Glaucom had a good post awhile ago about that on here.
I’m jump judging at the Coursebrook today. It’s a schooling trial, and appears to have more entries than their Spring recognized trial did. There isn’t much difference between them.
My preference for recognized competitions over unrecognized ones is primarily because I want to ride courses that are appropriately challenging for the level and to have my dressage judged by the best-qualified judges I can access.
The sentiment that unrecognized events are nearly perfect substitutes for recognized ones, especially when held at the same venues, surprises me a bit. Here is a quick comparison of the training level courses for the two events. Much of the course for the unrecognized event is the same as at the recognized event, but it is shorter and many of the most technical fences were removed or replaced. The following fences caused problems at the recognized event last weekend: 13A (jump before the water, looked like landing in water on approach), 6 (trakehner), 10A (down bank), 10B (brush that was an unrelated distance from 10A), 4B (corner off a bending line), 5 (airy fence with three chevrons), 8 (half coffin; EventEntries did not capture which element had the refusal). Only 13A and 6 caused multiple problems. Of these jumps, 13A (and B), 10A, and 6 have been removed from the course for the unrecognized event. There is an easier trakehner to replace 6 and the corner 4B is now numbered separately and set in a different area to make the approach easier. The half coffin seems to be the same as the previous weekend. The B element from the second water jump, which was a short 4 strides from the up bank, has also been removed, though it did not cause any problems during the recognized event.
Objectively, the XC at the unrecognized event is easier and less technical than the XC at the recognized event at the same facility and level the previous weekend. I am not saying that is inappropriate or bad. It’s good to have lots of options, though better if it is possible to know before entering about the types of challenges presented by various courses and competitions. But I do think it’s a difference between recognized and unrecognized events that might affect which competitions people choose to enter. (It also suggests that people like the posters on another thread who want more technical questions at the lower levels might want to look to recognized competitions over unrecognized ones at the same level.)
This is the biggest difference I’ve seen. IME most of the time the names of dressage judges at unrecognized events aren’t available ahead of time, and sometimes not even afterwards, unless you can decipher a squiggle in the signature line.
Once I was judged by a woman whose only apparent qualification was being a student of a regional BNT (or possibly just the owner of a horse in training with her?). She ran 20-30 min behind schedule and told me to ride a 2-loop serpentine like a drunken diagonal instead of like two half circles. It was bizarre. I asked management who she was afterwards and they immediately felt the need to apologize because so many other people had complained.
Since dressage has such a big influence on placings, if I were to only show unrecognized I’d probably feel the need to supplement with dressage shows for some actual perspective.
A main reason that schooling events are cheaper is that the organizer doesn’t need to bring in judges and officials from out of town. The cost of their travel and lodging is paid for by the competitors through higher entry fees. There is no way around this cost for recognized events.
In addition to being more affordable for competitors, schooling events are also more lucrative for the host venue/host organization. A number of farms that host recognized events in my area also host unrecognized events as part of their business plan. The revenue is needed to stay in business and reinvest in the cross county course.
I make a point of prioritizing competing (and volunteering) at my favorite events, both recognized and unrecognized, to help support the host venue/organizer.
i filled out the survey 
with similar comments above. I attend way more schooling shows because they are affordable and there are MORE of them in our area. Man- I have a hard time stomaching that I paid $85 for a stall for a schooling show and $250 for a rated. It is $400 before I even step in a ring at the rated. And if you look at the salaries of TPTB, you can see why some of the fees keep getting added on. $400 K for BM. annnnd What does he do?
I don’t have an issue with schooling shows at all. The point someone made earlier is fair—it can be a little eye-rolly when a rider gets, say, a 25 at a schooling show, then heads to a recognized and ends up in the 30s, followed by a round of complaints. But in all fairness, that same kind of score swing can happen week-to-week at recognized events too.
A lot of schooling shows aren’t set at full height or technical difficulty “by the book.” And that’s fine—soft, inviting courses serve a purpose. But I’ve also seen it play out in real life: someone cruises around Novice at schooling shows, where sometimes you can school the exact course the day before, then goes to a recognized and it’s an unsafe mess, followed by more complaints on social media.
Personally, I take schooling shows for what they are: a chance to go XC for a discounted fee and get mileage, which is exactly what I need. I’ve only ever used one schooling show as a true move-up—and that was because the course was identical to the recognized one from just a few weeks earlier. I wanted to see if I would get around but save about $175 if it was a disaster
I think it’s probably area/venue specific. Quite often in my area the courses are identical. We actually did our first Prelm at a schooling show, with the plan to run T or PT at the recognized a few weeks later and then move up recognized after that. Except my trainer asked, and the course was going to be the exact same, so we went ahead and ran P since we’d already run it at the schooling show.
I do agree about licensed judges though - one of the most interesting scribing experiences I’ve had was scribing for a dressage rider who was acting as a judge at a schooling event near me. The scores and comments were interesting to say the least, with not much variation related to what actually happened in the ring. I would not have been happy to pay for that quality (or lack thereof) of judging.
I filled out the survey as well, and agree it probably could have used some tweaks. I haven’t competed recognized recently because my older horse stepped down from eventing, and the baby horse isn’t ready yet - he gains much more at this point going to lots of little schooling shows to learn how to horse show. There’s minimal to no benefit to entering him pre-starter at a recognized show for a higher cost just to teach him how to get out and about.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
