What does competing FEI give me?

[leighbo009]

I actually had this thought/convo the other day driving home from a clinic. I was asked what my goals where, a 5*, a 2*, a 1*? My answers where maybe to a 2* or 1*, probably a no to anything higher… but asking me the same question using the national levels, prelim or modified, where more likely a yes. I was then asked why?
I felt the FEIs were just alot of money & paperwork for a similar experience.

Though, I do wish I could do the technical questions of a 5* at like a training level height… I really like the technical stuff & haven’t found a sport that scratches that itch of the technicalness…

[add_leg]

I’ve had this convo with multiple people recently! We want the technicality of Adv/Intermed/Prelim but at T/N/BN heights. I think it could be a huge hit for those who may not ever want to jump higher (or have the horse to do so) but want to do things like full coffins, combos, etc.

[Equibrit]

Take up hunting or team chasing. https://www.chronofhorse.com/article/from-team-riders-to-team-chase/

[Willesdon]

As the level increases, the technicality increases. Eventing is not only about the height of a fence: 5* is only 1.20m xc. Unlike SJ, the terrain is also highly influential. It takes time and training to build up through the levels.

A major changes is the speed across country, which obviously means a combination has to be more adjustable, more balanced and quicker in reaction times as they move up the levels, which generally means more experience.

The technicality moves up too. It is logical. At the lowest level the water jump may just be to pass between the flags through the water. Then an obstacle may be placed a few meters before the water and the jump becomes elements A&B because when the horse sees the water, it will influence how the horse jumps that first element. Then moving on up, the A element is placed closer to the water, even to jumping over and directly into the water - which is far harder to do. Then another obstacle is placed after the splashy bit and becomes element C because riding through water will affect the stride into that third element. Getting harder, place the third element ever closer to the water. Harder yet, introduce an obstacle in the water, to jump out of and into water and the problem is now becoming seriously challenging. Then the several parts all strung together, at increasing speed… Then throw in curves, slopes, light and shade to add to the technicality.

A course that included an 80cm obstacle jumped directly into water, onto an 80 cm obstacle set in the water, onto another 80cm obstacle set one or two strides beyond the wet bit would be highly technical and I personally would give odds that no combination would make it through. At 80cm, many combinations don’t even make it between two flags on either side of a pond.

[RAyers]

@Willesdon you are right. But maybe there is a way to create the same feel at 0.80m for experienced horses and riders? I agree that distances and such can not be set the same simply due to the physics of the efforts. A 1.0m A/B bounce into water is totally undoable at a lower height/level because there is not enough “fence mass” to slow the horses. I will add that there is a very specific intentionality in fence design and building to help the horse that riders don’t generally recognize. And some low level fences become very dangerous to upper level horses because the horse no longer reads the question correctly.

But, still, it would be cool to figure out how to give experienced low level riders the chance to experience what it feels to run an upper level course without the size. Kind of a taster flight.

[RAyers]

I love watching those helmet camera videos! We don’t have much of that in the western US though.

[evntr95]

I’ve done one whopping CCI**-L and approximately one bajillion prelims, including multiple appearances at AECs. I would love to do at least one more 2* before I’m done with the “upper” levels, but this time I’d like a clear XC and less SJ rails. My horse unfortunately took exception to the ditch on XC day and my back unfortunately took exception to existing and let me (and subsequently my horse) down on SJ day.

I wanted to do a 2* because I could. The same way people look at mountains and go “I want to climb that.” I’m in my late 30s and while I would theoretically love to go intermediate, and that is easily within the scope of my horse, I think I’m at the point where I need to accept that I’m just not brave enough. Prelim is still a challenge, but sometimes I want MORE challenge, without wanting to pee myself, as I’m sure I would when confronted with a max intermediate table.

A 2*-L gives me 2 extra inches of show jumping (1.15m) and ~2 minutes more of XC, plus a course that I know for certain will be on the more technical side (unlike say, AECs last year, which I honestly thought were a bit soft for a national prelim championship). And as an amateur, it sure feels nice to say that I did an FEI. And even more to say I did an FEI on a horse I got for free as a failed show jumper and developed myself up the levels.

It’s probably not worth the money, especially since I don’t need it for any sort of theoretical qualification, but I do plenty of other things with my horses that aren’t worth the money either. What’s one very expensive show in the grand scheme of things?

[RAyers]

So you look at it as a cost per minute of XC? You make good points. I appreciate the personal vision. In my case I go do A show jumpers to do the 1.15m (lot more bang for the dollar in my area). And if I want a long, more complex course, move up to OI.

Don’t sell yourself short about intermediate. I just turned 60 and doing this on a self made horse. One thing I’ve learned is that the bigger you go, the more you have to trust your horse, accept the fear, and just focus on balance. You can’t control the jump. That’s the horse’s job.

[add_leg]

I get the thought on the distances and why some things won’t work, but others I disagree with. Sure, at N or BN some won’t get through the water, but plenty of us have horses who don’t blink. We’ve schooled jumps in water or on mounds, full coffins, related distances and terrain - even though it would never be seen at our level. There’s no reason this “theoretical special event/level/whatever” couldn’t have a small jump on a mound, a skinny, a jump in water, a full coffin, a small chevron or a small drop into water. I say that as someone who has schooled all that at smaller sizes. I right now am happy to keep moving up and luckily have a horse to do so on, but he’s going to top out at some point or I’m going to say “nope, too big”.

So while some riders or horses going BN/N are green or struggle with the things as is (a ditch by itself, a water crossing, etc.) there are plenty who have experience at the level and don’t. Right now my goal is a N3D, but I think something like we are describing would be a lot of fun to get the experience.

[Marigold]

@evntr95

I do plenty of other things with my horses that aren’t worth the money either.

#horses

[Blugal]

One issue with trying to make a Novice “advanced” course is having jumps that fit the correct specifications. For instance, most event sites won’t have a chevron that is skinny and only 0.9m high. You can, of course, use schooling obstacles and even show jumps (Jump for Joy jumps and the like) to set up things to school at home.

[SaddleFitterVA]

Bragging rights, less money, more judges and a worry about false positives from environmental contamination in FEI drug testing.

Go for it, enjoy the bragging rights if you decide to do it!

[RedHorses]

It’s a safety thing, an extra division thing, an extra police who can enter thing, a sport mindset that height alone equals difficulty thing.

I wanted the same - some technical challenges at lower heights. The big problem is that people assume low height means easy and inviting to a young or green horse. Anyone daring to build a more technical, low height course would face lawsuits for excess difficulty when someone failed to actually read the division descriptions, entered the wrong class, and got hurt (because they lacked the sense to see what was in front of them and say nope).

But it would be so much fun! (For those of us who have experience and skills to manage technical questions without the desire to jump higher).

[quietann]

Could more technical options be provided? E.g. a ditch as the regular choice, with an optional log a few strides after?

[Blugal]

Under current USEF rules, course designers can’t set questions that are inappropriate for the level. So, you’d have to have a competition under some other auspice.

In Canada, we are branching out from plain horse trials to a few more options - the “I Can Event” program, and provincial programs. These still have rules and divisions with the difficulty associated with the heights.

Therefore, it’s highly unlikely anybody would be setting upper level questions at lower level heights, because the facility’s insurance will want the correct officials and design according to the specifications set out. The designer themselves will want to ensure they follow specifications so that they are covered by insurance, too.

[ClassyJumper]

Around here they have started doing xc derbys. I could see maybe setting up some more technical questions but with stadium jumps. Less risk and no need to build a separate course. As an ammy that would definitely top out at novice I think it would be fun.

[leighbo009]

@Blugal

Under current USEF rules, course designers can’t set questions that are inappropriate for the level. So, you’d have to have a competition under some other auspice.

That’s one reason why I had hoped that the xc equestrian thing (xc only) would take take these wants into its setup. With it having everything optional & scored on points, the more difficult things could be an option. But I don’t think they have realized the need/want for those options (yet?).

[leighbo009]

Spinoff: Technical Questions at the lower levels - wanted?

I made another thread about the lower levels wanting more technical. Since it has nothing to do with competing FEI…

[AskMyAccountant.17]

Funny enough, a few weeks ago I had a post about how I would always choose the FEI division, and I still aim for a Long-Format at the end of my season for a horse I’m bringing up the levels. But, at this time in his career, he has met the MERs needed for a long format at the current level. He doesn’t need to do another short, and I’m looking at $325 for the National or $500 for the FEI division… ( They should really study spending habits, if the entry said $499 I might not have thought as hard) No prize money, and the course runs the same. I don’t really want to spend an additional $175 for the FEI dressage test…

[AskMyAccountant.17]

Edited… theoretically if horse were to excel this fall and next year, if we moved up, and we were to aim for a 4-S, I guess he needs one more 3S. so I should get it done while I have a happy, sound horse on a course we know. Thats how they get you. You need them to move up.