archoak
Well-Known Member
I agree with Lec, I think it will calm down and you will be guaranteed a place with a sticker, you have just been really unlucky
BE balloting - is anyone addressing it ?
- Thread starter mrussell
- Start date
LEC
Opinions are like bum holes, everyone has one.
I can see your point about day tickets but IMO paying full membership and then running a horse on tickets is defeating the point of day tickets.
Day tickets were introduced to give tasters to people about eventing not for you to try and beat the system. Hence they are downgraded from full membership. If day tickets ran under the BSJA system of effectively running HC I bet you would not see people doing this they would cough up for full membership. I think with day tickets you know the rules and you take your chance.
BE does offer 1/2 membership but maybe you should be allowed to choose which half of the year? Maybe this would be an answer to the problem?
Day tickets were introduced to give tasters to people about eventing not for you to try and beat the system. Hence they are downgraded from full membership. If day tickets ran under the BSJA system of effectively running HC I bet you would not see people doing this they would cough up for full membership. I think with day tickets you know the rules and you take your chance.
BE does offer 1/2 membership but maybe you should be allowed to choose which half of the year? Maybe this would be an answer to the problem?
mrussell
Well-Known Member
Nope...not trying to beat the system at all...and I disagree that they are taster...otherwsie why make them available on an unlimited basis for horses?
We have a 15 year old horse who has been a good campaigner for us but cannot run on hard ground. The diary for this year put all East Anglain events in March, 1 after the other.... We cant afford to run him every weekend and it wouldnt be fair on him either. So we bought 2 day tickets to do 2 classes before the ground gets too hard....if it stays good the we will buy more.
We did do half membership last year but it runs 1st Jan to end June or 1st July to end of December. For a horse that cant run on hard ground it would make sense to allow you to run march-june and sept-october.
Oh and we have run HC for a whole season - didnt stop us coughing up for full membership for both horse and rider- as this horse had 30 points when he was eventied by a professional rider for his last owner but hasnt competed properly for 5 years due to injury of horse or rider....
We have a 15 year old horse who has been a good campaigner for us but cannot run on hard ground. The diary for this year put all East Anglain events in March, 1 after the other.... We cant afford to run him every weekend and it wouldnt be fair on him either. So we bought 2 day tickets to do 2 classes before the ground gets too hard....if it stays good the we will buy more.
We did do half membership last year but it runs 1st Jan to end June or 1st July to end of December. For a horse that cant run on hard ground it would make sense to allow you to run march-june and sept-october.
Oh and we have run HC for a whole season - didnt stop us coughing up for full membership for both horse and rider- as this horse had 30 points when he was eventied by a professional rider for his last owner but hasnt competed properly for 5 years due to injury of horse or rider....
lizzieb
Well-Known Member
I've got full BE membership and have fully registered one of my horses. But I've bought day tickets for my second horse as she was lame for most of last year so day tickets will save me a lot of money if she does one event this year then goes lame. I accept that she is likely to be balloted and accept this. But I don't see this as defeating the point of day tickets.
If day tickets ran HC I still wouldn't fully register her as I only compete at Intro and PN where prize money/prizes in kind are low value and we are very unlikely to win!
If day tickets ran HC I still wouldn't fully register her as I only compete at Intro and PN where prize money/prizes in kind are low value and we are very unlikely to win!
mrussell
Well-Known Member
Good point....but then the rider is being funded to compete that horse so havent had to pay the entry fee or register the horse themselves so perhaps they should have less priority than a day ticket holder...
SpruceRI
Well-Known Member
I think the trouble is, that now the age limit has been reduced, plus the incoming of Training Classes, it means more available members/people wanting to compete and less of the popular classes in a day (Intro & PN) as now some sections will be taken up with the Training class.
I believe there were some moans about that at Pulborough last year.
I believe there were some moans about that at Pulborough last year.
rubyslippers
Active Member
Completely agree with MR re; the fact that events being run back to back in areas, means one horse owners are limited unless they are willing to travel miles. It's like who ever plans the calendar is trying to group the same classes in the same areas in the same months!!
And yes, opening up the sport to younger members and lower levels has and will cause over subscription. The good news is that will increase funding for the sport we all love. However, the question is, how will it be spent. Some of it needs to be used to ensure that those members being inconvenienced by those hugely oversubscribed classes get the runs they are paying for and value for money. At present I don't think that is the case.
What I especially enjoy, is repeatedly being told to volunteer and sponsor classes in order to get, what every professional rider gets automatically for their membership fee. . . . . to run at the event of their choice!
And yes, opening up the sport to younger members and lower levels has and will cause over subscription. The good news is that will increase funding for the sport we all love. However, the question is, how will it be spent. Some of it needs to be used to ensure that those members being inconvenienced by those hugely oversubscribed classes get the runs they are paying for and value for money. At present I don't think that is the case.
What I especially enjoy, is repeatedly being told to volunteer and sponsor classes in order to get, what every professional rider gets automatically for their membership fee. . . . . to run at the event of their choice!
SpottedCat
Well-Known Member
But pro's give back to the sport in other ways - I think it is a bit unfair to say that because they don't volunteer you shouldn't have to either - would you really have wanted to be in Zara's shoes having to give intervuiews after a mistake in the showjumping at the European's has just cost you a medal and the dream of being European champion again?
They do course walks for mere mortals, sit on stands for hours at things like Your Horse Live, talk to the press, write diaries in eventing mag etc, all in the name of raising the profile of the sport (and their profile too I don't doubt).
People contribute in different ways and to imply that pro's do nothing is somewhat unfair I think.
They do course walks for mere mortals, sit on stands for hours at things like Your Horse Live, talk to the press, write diaries in eventing mag etc, all in the name of raising the profile of the sport (and their profile too I don't doubt).
People contribute in different ways and to imply that pro's do nothing is somewhat unfair I think.
keysoe
Well-Known Member
I think the big problem is the rule that organisers (if balloting) MUST run the same number of sections of each level running on the day
So if we ran
Saturday
N PN
Sunday
PN Intro
Then "fair" distribution of sections would be
Saturday 4 x N 2 X PN
Sunday 2 x PN 4 x Intro.
If we get more than 180 Intro and 90 PN entries for Sunday, then we HAVE to run at 135 PN and 135 Intro on that day.
The total number of entries is not considered when the section distribution is considered.
Professional & multi horse owners are at an advantage anyway, as (once in) they are unlikely to withdraw, as they tend to substitute, so "only" lose £10.
Perhaps the one horse rider should get a "local" ballot preference.
Buying a day ticket at intro does seem to be a wildly optimistic purchase
So if we ran
Saturday
N PN
Sunday
PN Intro
Then "fair" distribution of sections would be
Saturday 4 x N 2 X PN
Sunday 2 x PN 4 x Intro.
If we get more than 180 Intro and 90 PN entries for Sunday, then we HAVE to run at 135 PN and 135 Intro on that day.
The total number of entries is not considered when the section distribution is considered.
Professional & multi horse owners are at an advantage anyway, as (once in) they are unlikely to withdraw, as they tend to substitute, so "only" lose £10.
Perhaps the one horse rider should get a "local" ballot preference.
Buying a day ticket at intro does seem to be a wildly optimistic purchase
mrussell
Well-Known Member
Yes it must have been hard for Zara but thats her job..... her sponsors pay her to be high profile.... she doesnt have to sit in an odffice monday to friday to raise enough pennies to enter a class, she doesnt have to take a days leave for a mid week competition, she has grooms to help her when she is away competiting and she is doing no more by way of raising profiles than than the poor schmuck interviewing her as part of thier own job.
I also write a column but I do that ON TOP of a full time job. I dont do it for the money but because I enjoy doing it. Unfortunately for me, Im not sponsored to do it and still have to foot my own bills, muck out my own horses and struggle to get OH into events on his one trick pony...and all for the same membership as Zara's sponsers/owners are paying.
This is an excellent debate though...theres certainly lots of angles to this !!
I also write a column but I do that ON TOP of a full time job. I dont do it for the money but because I enjoy doing it. Unfortunately for me, Im not sponsored to do it and still have to foot my own bills, muck out my own horses and struggle to get OH into events on his one trick pony...and all for the same membership as Zara's sponsers/owners are paying.
This is an excellent debate though...theres certainly lots of angles to this !!
SpottedCat
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Yes it must have been hard for Zara but thats her job..... her sponsors pay her to be high profile.... she doesnt have to sit in an odffice monday to friday to raise enough pennies to enter a class, she doesnt have to take a days leave for a mid week competition, she has grooms to help her when she is away competiting and she is doing no more by way of raising profiles than than the poor schmuck interviewing her as part of thier own job.
I also write a column but I do that ON TOP of a full time job. I dont do it for the money but because I enjoy doing it. Unfortunately for me, Im not sponsored to do it and still have to foot my own bills, muck out my own horses and struggle to get OH into events on his one trick pony...and all for the same membership as Zara's sponsers/owners are paying.
This is an excellent debate though...theres certainly lots of angles to this !!
[/ QUOTE ]
You are not alone - I report from lots of events, sub-edit a few reports, interview riders, do millions of course photos etc etc. I work full time with stupid hours in the summer and do it all alone as well - but that is my choice. Yes, it is Zara's job, but it is unreasonable to say that pros don't put anything back in their own time, because they do. For example the people who taught on the Coaching Roadshows have said we can email them any queries, go and speak to them at events, and are trying to organise an acceredited trainer to be at each event for amateurs to ask for advice as many people don't want to both pros when they are riding.
Pros also get balloted - I see as many names I recognise on ballot lists as those I don't. It is unrealistic to think pros do not get balloted, they do (not aimed at you, just the general impression I get from this thread is that people think pros automatically get in - they don't IME).
Yes it must have been hard for Zara but thats her job..... her sponsors pay her to be high profile.... she doesnt have to sit in an odffice monday to friday to raise enough pennies to enter a class, she doesnt have to take a days leave for a mid week competition, she has grooms to help her when she is away competiting and she is doing no more by way of raising profiles than than the poor schmuck interviewing her as part of thier own job.
I also write a column but I do that ON TOP of a full time job. I dont do it for the money but because I enjoy doing it. Unfortunately for me, Im not sponsored to do it and still have to foot my own bills, muck out my own horses and struggle to get OH into events on his one trick pony...and all for the same membership as Zara's sponsers/owners are paying.
This is an excellent debate though...theres certainly lots of angles to this !!
[/ QUOTE ]
You are not alone - I report from lots of events, sub-edit a few reports, interview riders, do millions of course photos etc etc. I work full time with stupid hours in the summer and do it all alone as well - but that is my choice. Yes, it is Zara's job, but it is unreasonable to say that pros don't put anything back in their own time, because they do. For example the people who taught on the Coaching Roadshows have said we can email them any queries, go and speak to them at events, and are trying to organise an acceredited trainer to be at each event for amateurs to ask for advice as many people don't want to both pros when they are riding.
Pros also get balloted - I see as many names I recognise on ballot lists as those I don't. It is unrealistic to think pros do not get balloted, they do (not aimed at you, just the general impression I get from this thread is that people think pros automatically get in - they don't IME).
SpottedCat
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I think the big problem is the rule that organisers (if balloting) MUST run the same number of sections of each level running on the day
So if we ran
Saturday
N PN
Sunday
PN Intro
Then "fair" distribution of sections would be
Saturday 4 x N 2 X PN
Sunday 2 x PN 4 x Intro.
If we get more than 180 Intro and 90 PN entries for Sunday, then we HAVE to run at 135 PN and 135 Intro on that day.
The total number of entries is not considered when the section distribution is considered.
Professional & multi horse owners are at an advantage anyway, as (once in) they are unlikely to withdraw, as they tend to substitute, so "only" lose £10.
Perhaps the one horse rider should get a "local" ballot preference.
Buying a day ticket at intro does seem to be a wildly optimistic purchase
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks Keysoe, that's really interesting. I think that kind of thing is what BE should be thinking about - total distribution of entries per event, not per day. Mind you, I expect there was a reason for that rule in the first place, so no guarantee changing it would help.
I think the big problem is the rule that organisers (if balloting) MUST run the same number of sections of each level running on the day
So if we ran
Saturday
N PN
Sunday
PN Intro
Then "fair" distribution of sections would be
Saturday 4 x N 2 X PN
Sunday 2 x PN 4 x Intro.
If we get more than 180 Intro and 90 PN entries for Sunday, then we HAVE to run at 135 PN and 135 Intro on that day.
The total number of entries is not considered when the section distribution is considered.
Professional & multi horse owners are at an advantage anyway, as (once in) they are unlikely to withdraw, as they tend to substitute, so "only" lose £10.
Perhaps the one horse rider should get a "local" ballot preference.
Buying a day ticket at intro does seem to be a wildly optimistic purchase
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks Keysoe, that's really interesting. I think that kind of thing is what BE should be thinking about - total distribution of entries per event, not per day. Mind you, I expect there was a reason for that rule in the first place, so no guarantee changing it would help.
mrussell
Well-Known Member
No, thats not the aim of this topic.... the aim is to ask folk what they are doing about the ballot system...but its also raised the subjects of over subscription and the arrangement of the diary...along with the issue of multiple riders and those entering HC taking precedence over folk on day tickets and others with only 1 horse who have less chance of getting thier monies worth of events in a season.
I dont think anyone thinks Pros dont give back to the sport but that isnt the issue here.
No one is anymore or less deserving and thats the whole point...because thats now how the BE system is working this year...
I dont think anyone thinks Pros dont give back to the sport but that isnt the issue here.
No one is anymore or less deserving and thats the whole point...because thats now how the BE system is working this year...
SpottedCat
Well-Known Member
I know - I appreciate what you were discussing, I had just noticed that people seem to think that a)pros don't give back and b)pros are more likely to get in by dint of who they are. I don't think either of those points are true, and I don't think it is fair to suggest (as some people were doing) that it is the case.
FWIW I think day tickets should go first (has to be an incentive to do full registration), then I think all riders should be accepted on their first horse with multiple rides balloted before single rides (think there is space on the form to state which horse you want accepted first) - this is regardless of HC or not as HC is something different I think and i see no reason why you shouldn't have as much right to run HC as 'in contention'. I think distribution of entries shoudl be over the entire event not as Keysoe pointed out over each day. And I think the obligation to accept higher level entries should remain as there are fewer of these events about and people are often working to a timetable for a specific qualificaiton purpose etc (which at intro, PN and N is less significant IMO because there are more events and you can run more often). I also accept that there is probably a reason for things being the way they are and that changing thing probably won't make them that much better....
FWIW I think day tickets should go first (has to be an incentive to do full registration), then I think all riders should be accepted on their first horse with multiple rides balloted before single rides (think there is space on the form to state which horse you want accepted first) - this is regardless of HC or not as HC is something different I think and i see no reason why you shouldn't have as much right to run HC as 'in contention'. I think distribution of entries shoudl be over the entire event not as Keysoe pointed out over each day. And I think the obligation to accept higher level entries should remain as there are fewer of these events about and people are often working to a timetable for a specific qualificaiton purpose etc (which at intro, PN and N is less significant IMO because there are more events and you can run more often). I also accept that there is probably a reason for things being the way they are and that changing thing probably won't make them that much better....
mrussell
Well-Known Member
Spot on with most of that I reckon SpottedCat...not sure about the HC bit.... OH did run HC a couple of times when we first got this horse as he had never evented before but there is always Unaff ODEs which are virtually the same at Intro level...and if you are entering above that there are Open classes so no need to go HC.....
There is always room for improvement and perhaps BE should be looking at the arrangement of the diary, adding extra days OR if not, restricting day ticket sales or new memberships.
Failing that perhaps reduced memberships for folk who probably wont be able to get to more than 2 or 3 comps because of the above issues in a year...or even make entries on a first come first served basis so people can plan ahead and get thier entries and not have to worry about havibng to switch quickly if they are balloted out again.
I hope someone on high is watching this thread as its had some excellent issues raised.....
There is always room for improvement and perhaps BE should be looking at the arrangement of the diary, adding extra days OR if not, restricting day ticket sales or new memberships.
Failing that perhaps reduced memberships for folk who probably wont be able to get to more than 2 or 3 comps because of the above issues in a year...or even make entries on a first come first served basis so people can plan ahead and get thier entries and not have to worry about havibng to switch quickly if they are balloted out again.
I hope someone on high is watching this thread as its had some excellent issues raised.....
SpottedCat
Well-Known Member
I hadn't really thought about open classes, that does solve the HC issue I guess, so yes, ballot them too!
BE do have refunds if you get to fewer than a certain number of events a year, I remember reading about it in the rule book. Maybe its if you get to none though? Can't quite remember.
First come first served is difficult because those with internet access will inevitably be better off than those without - which is a bit discriminatory I think.
If we are ranting though....the extra charge for entering online, WTF is that all about? We do 99% of the admin for them, they say they prefer it, and yet they hit us with a card charge. Totally unfair IMO as there isn't an event under about £45, and if shops only charge if it is under a fiver, then why BE think it is acceptable I don't know. I think either the cost for internet entries should be incorporated in the entry fee, or it should be waived as we've reduced the admin cost. As far as I can see, the only incentive to enter online is that you can use your credit card!!
BE do have refunds if you get to fewer than a certain number of events a year, I remember reading about it in the rule book. Maybe its if you get to none though? Can't quite remember.
First come first served is difficult because those with internet access will inevitably be better off than those without - which is a bit discriminatory I think.
If we are ranting though....the extra charge for entering online, WTF is that all about? We do 99% of the admin for them, they say they prefer it, and yet they hit us with a card charge. Totally unfair IMO as there isn't an event under about £45, and if shops only charge if it is under a fiver, then why BE think it is acceptable I don't know. I think either the cost for internet entries should be incorporated in the entry fee, or it should be waived as we've reduced the admin cost. As far as I can see, the only incentive to enter online is that you can use your credit card!!
nicolajoyce
New User
Hi there,
this is my first post on this site, as a fairly new member. I am intrigued by this debate as a rider and a long suffering partner of a proffesional rider
I agree it is so frustrating getting balloted as a one horse rider, this has also happened to alot of my freinds this season. But I think it is unfair to say the proffessional's dont deserve to get in... this is after their full time job, unfortunately they dont get days off... very rarely. So being balloted for them means they are unable to make a living.
BE need to consider possibly running different sections for pros and working riders. What about reducing the fee to join for working riders? that way the proffesionals pay more as that is what they do for a living...
Just a few thougts...
this is my first post on this site, as a fairly new member. I am intrigued by this debate as a rider and a long suffering partner of a proffesional rider
I agree it is so frustrating getting balloted as a one horse rider, this has also happened to alot of my freinds this season. But I think it is unfair to say the proffessional's dont deserve to get in... this is after their full time job, unfortunately they dont get days off... very rarely. So being balloted for them means they are unable to make a living.
BE need to consider possibly running different sections for pros and working riders. What about reducing the fee to join for working riders? that way the proffesionals pay more as that is what they do for a living...
Just a few thougts...
hotellie
Well-Known Member
i have just thought of something and that is thatwhen a pro enter say 6 horses they may all have ballot stickers on as for the next few weeks they may not run as they will have their next 20 horses running all with ballot stickers on...i dont know though...just a thought???
LEC
Opinions are like bum holes, everyone has one.
While I am thinking about it something that drives me insane is that take Aldon when is PN running Friday, when is OI running Sunday. It just does not make sense to me that the proportions of working riders are totally stung when it would make no difference to pros. Where there is an Intermediate class it always seems to run later which pushes PN and N to the beginning and if running lots of classes then inevitably it ends up on a weekday
Thistle
Well-Known Member
totally agree.
Also they keep putting JRN's on a Sat.
A high % of eventing teenagers go to independent school. The majority of which have Saturday school.
So put the JRN on a Sunday please.
Also they keep putting JRN's on a Sat.
A high % of eventing teenagers go to independent school. The majority of which have Saturday school.
So put the JRN on a Sunday please.
mrussell
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I think it is unfair to say the proffessional's dont deserve to get in... this is after their full time job, unfortunately they dont get days off... very rarely. So being balloted for them means they are unable to make a living.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you read down a bit you will probably see that no one is singling out the Pro's or saying that they dont deserve to get in...its more a discussion about the current ballot system for working/one horse/day ticket riders.
(but you could say that a non-pro gets just as little time off because they do have to work that much harder to get a horse up to this level in the few hours they get after work...and he or she has to fund it all themselves. Getting the chance to run at a local event is just as important to them).
Excellent point about the fee's though !!
Welcome to the forum by the way !!!!
I think it is unfair to say the proffessional's dont deserve to get in... this is after their full time job, unfortunately they dont get days off... very rarely. So being balloted for them means they are unable to make a living.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you read down a bit you will probably see that no one is singling out the Pro's or saying that they dont deserve to get in...its more a discussion about the current ballot system for working/one horse/day ticket riders.
(but you could say that a non-pro gets just as little time off because they do have to work that much harder to get a horse up to this level in the few hours they get after work...and he or she has to fund it all themselves. Getting the chance to run at a local event is just as important to them).
Excellent point about the fee's though !!
Baydale
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
BE need to consider possibly running different sections for pros and working riders. What about reducing the fee to join for working riders? that way the proffesionals pay more as that is what they do for a living...
[/ QUOTE ]
I think we had a post about this ages ago, and most agreed that they want to be able to compete against the pros. Can you imagine the difficulty there would be defining an amateur or working rider, and a professional.
As the OH of a pro rider, how does it look from their side of the fence? Surely pros must get balloted and have owners on their backs when it happens because their horse hasn't had a run?
BE need to consider possibly running different sections for pros and working riders. What about reducing the fee to join for working riders? that way the proffesionals pay more as that is what they do for a living...
[/ QUOTE ]
I think we had a post about this ages ago, and most agreed that they want to be able to compete against the pros. Can you imagine the difficulty there would be defining an amateur or working rider, and a professional.
As the OH of a pro rider, how does it look from their side of the fence? Surely pros must get balloted and have owners on their backs when it happens because their horse hasn't had a run?
lifeslemons
Well-Known Member
I think people need to remember that balloting IS entirely random... literally names out of a hat. Professionals may have three horses running in a section, but the chances are another three of their horses will have been balloted.
Its worth remembering that professionals have to make a living out of the sport. Is it fair for them to travel to an event with just one horse? Eventually riders wouldn't bother going because it becomes financially unviable for them to leave the rest of their horses at home, often unworked, or having to employ extra staff. This is why Mathew Wright, for example, is competing in Ireland so often, or why Zara opted to go to Borroca this year. They have to be able to run their horses in order to succeed and thus make a living.
Its a trickey situation and balancing act in order to make everyone happy. The professionals are reliant on the rest of us to fund the sport, but equally, the professionals are the ones who hold the core of the sport together. They bring in the lottery funding that filters down the system and allows BE to run its many open training days. They provide the affilated xc courses we get to school around, or the accrediated trainers that are so invaluable. Furthermore, it is the professionals that draw sponsors to events - the promise of Olympic competitors running.
What I am saying is everyone suffers more or less equally - its simply that the pros have more horses entered in the first place. I'm merely trying to argue their side too!
Finally, it's all very well saying "something MUST be done" or "balloting sucks." No offence guys, but this debate, while fascinating, has thrown up plenty of moaning, but, (with a few exceptions) has failed to provide any workable or realistic solutions. Hence why BE is struggling itself... and why Mike E-S' priorty within his new Sports Director role is the calender and balloting.
Its worth remembering that professionals have to make a living out of the sport. Is it fair for them to travel to an event with just one horse? Eventually riders wouldn't bother going because it becomes financially unviable for them to leave the rest of their horses at home, often unworked, or having to employ extra staff. This is why Mathew Wright, for example, is competing in Ireland so often, or why Zara opted to go to Borroca this year. They have to be able to run their horses in order to succeed and thus make a living.
Its a trickey situation and balancing act in order to make everyone happy. The professionals are reliant on the rest of us to fund the sport, but equally, the professionals are the ones who hold the core of the sport together. They bring in the lottery funding that filters down the system and allows BE to run its many open training days. They provide the affilated xc courses we get to school around, or the accrediated trainers that are so invaluable. Furthermore, it is the professionals that draw sponsors to events - the promise of Olympic competitors running.
What I am saying is everyone suffers more or less equally - its simply that the pros have more horses entered in the first place. I'm merely trying to argue their side too!
Finally, it's all very well saying "something MUST be done" or "balloting sucks." No offence guys, but this debate, while fascinating, has thrown up plenty of moaning, but, (with a few exceptions) has failed to provide any workable or realistic solutions. Hence why BE is struggling itself... and why Mike E-S' priorty within his new Sports Director role is the calender and balloting.
nicolajoyce
New User
Hi,
Thanks for the nice welcomes
I didnt think that anyone was singling out the pro's, its a really difficult subject where both sides have a valid point.
I used to be a working rider- and god yes its hard work, working full time and competing. But it was my choice and I loved it. I am not saying working riders work any less harder, I just wanted to give the other side of the story where a proffessional rider cant afford not to run a horse as it is their way of making a living.
Our owners are very understanding when it comes to balloting, fortunately we dont get balloted very often. But if pro's were balloted the same as working riders, it would be chaos trying to plan a season for all the horses and possibly the loss of some owners along the way... (in extreme cases)
I didnt know there had been a debate already about different sections for Pro's. I guess if people really want to compete against pro's then balloting is a sacrifice they will have to take... Other than finding more venues I dont know how BE will get around this???
Thanks for the nice welcomes
I didnt think that anyone was singling out the pro's, its a really difficult subject where both sides have a valid point.
I used to be a working rider- and god yes its hard work, working full time and competing. But it was my choice and I loved it. I am not saying working riders work any less harder, I just wanted to give the other side of the story where a proffessional rider cant afford not to run a horse as it is their way of making a living.
Our owners are very understanding when it comes to balloting, fortunately we dont get balloted very often. But if pro's were balloted the same as working riders, it would be chaos trying to plan a season for all the horses and possibly the loss of some owners along the way... (in extreme cases)
I didnt know there had been a debate already about different sections for Pro's. I guess if people really want to compete against pro's then balloting is a sacrifice they will have to take... Other than finding more venues I dont know how BE will get around this???
SpottedCat
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I think people need to remember that balloting IS entirely random... literally names out of a hat.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not true - it is up to the entries sec who they accept and I know they will accept certain people over and above others...for example if your cheque has bounced in the past, expect to be balloted first if the same entries sec is doing that event.
I think people need to remember that balloting IS entirely random... literally names out of a hat.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not true - it is up to the entries sec who they accept and I know they will accept certain people over and above others...for example if your cheque has bounced in the past, expect to be balloted first if the same entries sec is doing that event.
mrussell
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Finally, it's all very well saying "something MUST be done" or "balloting sucks." No offence guys, but this debate, while fascinating, has thrown up plenty of moaning, but, (with a few exceptions) has failed to provide any workable or realistic solutions. Hence why BE is struggling itself... and why Mike E-S' priorty within his new Sports Director role is the calender and balloting.
[/ QUOTE ]
Let hope Mike E-S has a few ideas up his sleeve....after all...its our money we are wasting if we cant get into enough classes to make our £110pa worth spending.
As for moaning.... if we dont voice our views then nothing is ever likely to get done. BE wonders why less people renew every year... well these little moans might well be the tip of a very big and seemingly invisible iceberg.
Its not necessarily our place to find solutions.... just to raise the questions.
Finally, it's all very well saying "something MUST be done" or "balloting sucks." No offence guys, but this debate, while fascinating, has thrown up plenty of moaning, but, (with a few exceptions) has failed to provide any workable or realistic solutions. Hence why BE is struggling itself... and why Mike E-S' priorty within his new Sports Director role is the calender and balloting.
[/ QUOTE ]
Let hope Mike E-S has a few ideas up his sleeve....after all...its our money we are wasting if we cant get into enough classes to make our £110pa worth spending.
As for moaning.... if we dont voice our views then nothing is ever likely to get done. BE wonders why less people renew every year... well these little moans might well be the tip of a very big and seemingly invisible iceberg.
Its not necessarily our place to find solutions.... just to raise the questions.
archoak
Well-Known Member
Agree with Lec (again!) Jack had a day off school for Tweseldown as the PNP was on Thursday, yet the intermediate was Saturday.
daisycrazy
Well-Known Member
In my experience balloting is anything but random. Was told in writing (e-mail) by one entries secretary that the event had balloted on a "geographical" basis, i.e. furthest away first. I was balloted out with a sticker. Which was particularly annoying because I'd used that sticker for that event instead of Oasby and had offered to volunteer and provided an extra helper for Oasby to avoid being balloted.
As it happens my only horse has just fractured his neck so it doesn't matter. Did mention it to the BE regional director, though, who passed it to BE, who failed to respond... So whilst I may get my horse registration fee back due to his injury, I don't think I'm getting much for my £110 at the moment!
As it happens my only horse has just fractured his neck so it doesn't matter. Did mention it to the BE regional director, though, who passed it to BE, who failed to respond... So whilst I may get my horse registration fee back due to his injury, I don't think I'm getting much for my £110 at the moment!
archoak
Well-Known Member
So from reading people's experiences it seems that the ballot process can be entirely down to the organisers discretion despite having a set of rules (as previously posted) to follow
SpruceRI
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
.
[/ QUOTE ]
As for moaning.... if we dont voice our views then nothing is ever likely to get done. BE wonders why less people renew every year... well these little moans might well be the tip of a very big and seemingly invisible iceberg.
Its not necessarily our place to find solutions.... just to raise the questions.
[/ QUOTE ]
To add to this - I'd like something to be done about prize money or lack of it.
How come when you enter, most events have 'Upper limit' entry fees, but you rarely see 'upper limit prizes/money'?
Some events are very generous, Borde Hill for one, and some are very stingy to the point of taking the pee.
Some while ago I came 5th in a PN section. 1st -4th place and the 6th place won a saddlecloth. My 5th place merited me with a magnetic mechanics dish (stud dish), worth £1.50.
Now, that class was sponsored. I guess the sponsor didn't provide enough prize money, so someone dug this pathetic object out of their garage and thought 'that'll do'. I think the 6th place person was well known to the organisers, so they felt they couldn't give her the crummy prize.
And I'm supposed to shake hands with the Official and look grateful WHY?
[ QUOTE ]
.
[/ QUOTE ]
As for moaning.... if we dont voice our views then nothing is ever likely to get done. BE wonders why less people renew every year... well these little moans might well be the tip of a very big and seemingly invisible iceberg.
Its not necessarily our place to find solutions.... just to raise the questions.
[/ QUOTE ]
To add to this - I'd like something to be done about prize money or lack of it.
How come when you enter, most events have 'Upper limit' entry fees, but you rarely see 'upper limit prizes/money'?
Some events are very generous, Borde Hill for one, and some are very stingy to the point of taking the pee.
Some while ago I came 5th in a PN section. 1st -4th place and the 6th place won a saddlecloth. My 5th place merited me with a magnetic mechanics dish (stud dish), worth £1.50.
Now, that class was sponsored. I guess the sponsor didn't provide enough prize money, so someone dug this pathetic object out of their garage and thought 'that'll do'. I think the 6th place person was well known to the organisers, so they felt they couldn't give her the crummy prize.
And I'm supposed to shake hands with the Official and look grateful WHY?