Proposed BE entry rule changes - Views please

[HHnewsdesk]

Hello all,

Two interesting ideas are set to trial next year following a meeting of the sport committee on 30 August:

8. A cross-section of events will be asked to trial ‘first come, first served’ entries next season.
9. In addition, ‘entries in principle’ whereby riders enter a number of horses and then confirm ‘definite entries’ 48 or 72 hours beforehand will also be trialled next season.

Point 8: This will basically do away with the ballot system that is currently employed. It is unclear precisely how this will run. Do you think getting rid of the ballot system is a good idea? Do you have reservations that this could exclude some people who do not use the internet? Have you had problems with balloting?

Point 9: This will mainly affect those riders who have multiple horses. Under the current rules riders have to say which horse they are entering, if this changes then substitution fees come into play which can cause confusion and expense. This change is suggesting that riders effectively buy 'slots', similar to in racing, and then 48 or 72 hours beforehand confirm which horse they are running. Do you feel this is a sensible idea?

Any views or opinions on these proposed trials would be much appreciated. Either reply below or feel free to email me at ben_scott@freelance.ipcmedia.com

Many thanks,

Ben Scott (H&H news desk)

 

[millitiger]

I feel that BE need to focus more on rule changes that help amateur riders and owners, rather than spending time and resources helping the professionals get even more of an edge.

Both of these rules realistically are aimed at riders with a string of horses and imo it makes it even more apparent that BE take the amateur, grassroots rider for granted.

 

[kerilli]

I agree. These will both benefit multiple-horse riders, who are far more likely to be professionals.
Point 9 is pretty superfluous isn't it? The vast majority of events allow substitutions (either horse or rider change) anyway, in fact I can only think of one or two events when it hasn't been allowed.
I strongly feel that all events should be forced to publish a Waitlist online and show riders being moved off the top of it and into the Entries as soon as there is a withdrawal. At the moment the system is still open to abuse by some Organisers, and others totally refuse to hold a Waitlist (in spite of always being oversubscribed) and also refuse to give a refund for any reason (incl vets' and doctors' notes.) The system is not fair enough, and it should be.

Yes, I've had problems with balloting in the past, including a run of balloting of one horse, very annoying. I think if a horse is balloted from any event (not just with a Special Entry sticker on) then there should be some way of ensuring it has priority into the next event the rider aims for.

 

[Santa_Claus]

To be honest if the two rules are combined then the amateur one horse riders are going to be pushed out of popular events by the pros. if entries open what 6 weeks prior to the event then the pros can be confident of having lets say 4 horses running in a section as they have 6 in the yard. They can therefore get in on entry opening date buying up 4 slots knowing they wont lose money as they will have enough horses and can confirm a few days before, and if they run a 5th they will norm get it in late notice anyway taking a withdrawal slot even on day (come on we know it happens!!). before you know it the entries list is full of pros with amateurs fighting for the few remaining entry slots.

The amateurs with one horse on the otherhand will be having to make very early decisions and could potentially lose a lot of money or will alternatively have to take the risk of entering later and not getting in. 6 weeks is an awful long time in the life of an amateur 1 horse owner! I can see popular events running first come first served entries filling up within a few days with people otherwise panicking they won't get in. What happens to the poor unfortunate amateur who is on holiday with no internet access when entries open for their one local event and doesn't have anyone to enter for them? oh yes they won't get in. Granted can still happen now with a ballot but they can use their super ballot sticker to pretty much garauntee entry to their local event.

I can see the theory with multiple horse slots as it removes substitution costs and on its own it shouldn't effect amateur and grassroots riders although for programmes etc surely more than 48 hours notice is required?

 

[bounce]

As a BE80 single horse owner/rider I have to disagree slightly and say that at the moment I am in favour of the first come first served entry system.

Why should I get balloted out by someone who has left it last minute to enter when I managed to enter as soon as the entries open. I can see that you don't always know whether you are going to be ready to enter or you might leave it late if you think your horse could pick up an injury but that could happen even if you enter a week before the event. At unaffiliated events I am happy in the knowledge that I have entered as soon as possible and can then guarantee my entry is accepted rather than entering 6 weeks in advance to then find that a couple of weeks beforehand my entry is balloted and I have to try and find somewhere else to go that is still taking entries.

 

[smurf]

Even though the ballot system may go there will still have to be a date that no refunds are issued (unless replaced by a waitlist entry), ie this is now the ballot date.

So surely all that will happen is on the day entries open if you are vaguely thinking about going you will enter and then the day before the last w/d there will be a mass of people w/d? Not sure this will help organisers know who is coming until after the w/d - which is a bit like the situation at the moment where they don't know til after the ballot date as people wait til then to enter.

 

[luce1]

I am personnaly in favour of a first come first serve basis on entries. It annoys me when you are one of the first to enter (but didnt use a ballot sticker) and then people come along the day before the ballot date with super ballot stickers, get in, then you get balloted even though you have been more organised with your entries!!

 

[Hels_Bells]

As a single horse rider/owner I would not be happy at all with these changes. I don't have huge resources and usually enter events 3-4 weeks in advance, sometimes less for financial reasons.

I recently entered an event where a huge number of riders had 4 or more horses entered. As a result my class was full and I was put on a wait-list and told it was highly unlikely I would get in. Then 3 days before the event I was told a lot of horses had been withdrawn (a look at the new section lists seemed to suggest that some of the riders with multiple horses entered had dropped their numbers) and I could get a place. By this time my usual transport was unavailable and I had to miss out on yet another event in a season that has already been poor due to cancellations etc. Hence, the sound of this new system benefitting pros with multiple horses is not to my liking! Entry fees are already so high that it's a struggle for someone like me, but for pros with sponsorship and owners to help them out they can afford to pick and choose events, which horses to enter, how many horses to enter etc and then change their mind when the event gets nearer - I don't have that luxury.

What is the point in supposedly investing more in the "grassroots" area of the sport one year, then turning around and slapping the grassroots members in the face the next!!??

 

[Santa_Claus]

but the argument there is you could have used your super ballot sticker as well. every horse has the same number of ballot stickers, as the rider you should use them carefully accordingly. This year admittedly local events to me (well within 2.5-3 hours) haven't balloted at all so it wouldn't matter what system was used especially as many were taking entries up to a couple days before.

You say people aren't organised if they enter on ballot date but that ballot date is three weeks before an event. What if you are waiting on a run 3.5 weeks before an event (so before current ballot) to decide which class to enter as may want to step up a level or down? You could well be forced into entering a class you did not want to if entering 6 weeks in advance, and then you probably wouldn't be able to change classes even before the standard ballot date because the other class is full. So what do you do lose your entry/get refunded and hope you can get into another event close by at late notice or compete in the class you didn't want to, or not event at all for another few weeks as everything else roundabouts is full/unsuitable?

 

[Matafleur]

As a single horse owner/rider I don't have any problem with the current ballot system - I have never been balloted from an event whilst I have been a full member and I live in an area with a lot of popular events. You just have to be a bit savvy with your stickers, I find that it's unlikely that I'll be going to more than one event a month that is likely to ballot anyway and I don't think I've ever used all my stickers in one year.

For me BE really need to make waitlists compulsory and public. I'm not really fussed how they do it provided the system is consistent across the board and available for all to see. Everybody knows that it's common practice for multi horse riders to shove an extra one on the box and get it slotted in on the day. It just annoys me that this goes on but then events are taking 2 entry fees for one slot in a class.

I certainly don't want to move to 1st come 1st served entries despite the fact that I sometimes enter on the day entries open.

 

[popsdosh]

I am afraid that these proposals are unfair to one horse owners and refunds will never be sorted when one of the worst culprits for not giving refunds is on the board at BE.

 

[ihatework]

I have no issue with rule 9. If it helps out the pro's then fine, it won't really affect the one horse amateurs. Might just be more of an administrative burden for the organisers and would likely mean owners couldn't have their horses name in print in schedule.

Regarding 8. I like the general concept but feel that it has the potential to really impact on the one horse amateur. At least with the specials & ballot stickers, the working rider who is restricted to eventing on certain days and at certain events has some chance of getting into the events they want. I'm all for rewarding those people who get entries in early.
Perhaps a staged 'entries open' date would work, i.e. specials open, one week later ballots open and one week after that non-stickers open.

 

[Santa_Claus]

But a staggered entry would have the same effect as first come first served on those who can only decide on the correct class 3 weeks before as they will be forced to enter before the prior event. and let's face it one horse amateurs are the ones who normally hum and ha about which level to enter when going up a level and they are also the riders who can't afford to drive half way cross the country as their local event is full. They are also the riders who generally compete once a month so often don't decide what level to enter next till after their last event

I really do think the current ballot works best

 

[ihatework]

I really do think the current ballot works best

TBH, I agree! I'm not sure why BE is trying to change something that I do not feel to be a huge issue as it runs already. They should be concentrating their efforts on the withdrawal and refund system.

I would clarify that I think sometimes the Pro's are given a hard time about multiple rides though. What you have to remember is the majority of their rides with be owned by an 'owner'. That owner, if highlighted as such within BE, has paid to be a BE member and as such has IMO equal rights to expect their horse to be able to run at events of their choice. So although it might look greedy that a pro takes 5 slots in a class, in reality there could be 5 different owners behind those horses.

I was utterly appauled at the approach Gatcombe recently took to ballotting the 3DE. They accepted the horses with the most number of BE points. Which resulted in pro's getting in an amateurs being shown the door. There had to be a fairer way than that surely?

 

[AandK]

As a single horse owner/rider I don't have any problem with the current ballot system - I have never been balloted from an event whilst I have been a full member and I live in an area with a lot of popular events. You just have to be a bit savvy with your stickers, I find that it's unlikely that I'll be going to more than one event a month that is likely to ballot anyway and I don't think I've ever used all my stickers in one year.

For me BE really need to make waitlists compulsory and public. I'm not really fussed how they do it provided the system is consistent across the board and available for all to see. Everybody knows that it's common practice for multi horse riders to shove an extra one on the box and get it slotted in on the day. It just annoys me that this goes on but then events are taking 2 entry fees for one slot in a class.

I certainly don't want to move to 1st come 1st served entries despite the fact that I sometimes enter on the day entries open.

Exactly this! The only time I was in danger of being balloted was the one year I was BE'ing on a ticket and I managed to get in as I offered to do day before dressage.

I also think that the withdrawal/refund/waitlist system needs to be looked at as a priority.

 

[AandK]

I would clarify that I think sometimes the Pro's are given a hard time about multiple rides though. What you have to remember is the majority of their rides with be owned by an 'owner'. That owner, if highlighted as such within BE, has paid to be a BE member and as such has IMO equal rights to expect their horse to be able to run at events of their choice. So although it might look greedy that a pro takes 5 slots in a class, in reality there could be 5 different owners behind those horses.

That is a good point, and one I had not thought of before!!

 

[LEC]

I disagree with first come first served. If they sorted out the W/D procedure I would never leave it to the last minute.

At unaff I do not mind first come first served because it is half the price of BE and every time I have withdrawn they have usually managed to replace me or have a much more generous W/D process than BE events.

I can see why organisers would want it as they could effectively shut entries after 24 hours if they are a popular event. I think the current entries system works fine its other bits that need tweaking like waitlists!

 

[gracemoran]

I think the first come first served entry is a possible winner for the amateur riders as it does tend to be be the pros that enter at the last gasp! Even if people do enter dead early and then withdraw surley that just means the next person on the list gets their place?
Although I do think it would be an absolute must for organisers to keep a waitlist if this was brought in so people can be replaced if they withdraw.

As for the "intention" to run entry I think this is perhaps more complex. I would hate to think that people (in particular pros) could enter two events on the same weekend and then make a choice the day before as to where they were going to run depending on the weather/going etc. Organisers need some idea of numbers to know their event is going to be viable to run. I think it would have to be that you reserve 4 places and you pay in full for those 4 places and then decide nearer the time which horses fill those 4 places for this system to work. If people can float between events on the same weekend then this is unfair on spectators, sponsors, stabling etc etc. If you then don't run any horses you lose all your money.

 

[lannerch]

I would hate any alternative that meant you no longer could get preferential entries for members for certain events.
I would hate no not get into my most local event because the post in my area was slow!
Also should we not encourage people to become members in the absence of ballot stickers what is the incentive especially on half yearly membership where day tickets instead suffice!

 

[Fairy Dust]

I also think that the withdrawal/refund/waitlist system needs to be looked at as a priority.[/QUOTE]

Agree with the above, this needs to be looked at as a priority.

The only time I have been balloted was when I was on a day ticket, however I only enter 1 maybe 2 events each month so can normally use my monthly ballot or a super ballot number.

Can they not look into splitting it to first come first serve for the first week/2 weeks after the open day (to ensure all those organised get a space) and then maybe go into a ballot situation? Might sound confusing but I just think it would reward those who are organised and have quite a set plan for the season??

 

[willtowin]

I agree. These will both benefit multiple-horse riders, who are far more likely to be professionals.
Point 9 is pretty superfluous isn't it? The vast majority of events allow substitutions (either horse or rider change) anyway, in fact I can only think of one or two events when it hasn't been allowed.QUOTE]

They do allow substitutions but once when we changed horses without a vets note they charged us £12.50 for the change, which we were happy to do. We have a few horses and we often know where we're going so this rule won't affect us too much, but I think it will be handy for the pros. However I disagree with point 8, its the whole point of ballot stickers, and as paying members I feel we should have priority over day tickets, though maybe they could try that rule for BE80 classes? Even though most people that do them tend to be on training tickets anyway.

 

[SpottedCat]

Repeatedly BE has shown it doesn't give two hoots about the amateur rider. Both these rules stand to benefit the pros and penalise the one/two horse amateur rider. Yes, the pros may have one owner behind each horse, BUT the system clearly will benefit them because as said, they have (lets say) 5 horses in a yard at a level, they buy 3 slots, then they choose which to take knowing one may not be 100% and one may not be ready/have got in elsewhere.

The first-come-first-served again is a kick in the teeth for one-horse riders - the pro has likely got a horse that can be substituted, so they enter anyway, knowing that at best they have just bought a slot, at worst there is a £10 admin charge. The amateur meanwhile has to take a gamble on either losing the money or not getting the run. At least with the current system if due to work you can only event on certain days, you can use stickers to help ensure your entry.

When will BE realise that the reason people leave it so late to enter is because of the completely ridiculous, unfair and frankly shady practice relating to waitlists/refunds/withdrawals etc? I know they changed the rule to say if you're replaced you must get a refund - but exactly how is that being policed when events are not forced to hold public waitlists and will still accept Mr/s Sponsored-Hero rocking up on the day and slotting in? Whose to know that even happened?! Certainly not the person who doesn't get the refund.

If BE really want to sort out the issue of late entries, then they'd make waitlists public and compulsory and they'd have a fairer system for refunds in the case of withdrawal. As it is, they seem completely ham-strung by organisers who are making £££ on the side and utterly unwilling to take a positive stance on this for the grassroots amateur.

I suppose the other side to it is that if all the people who currently enter late, continue to do so, rather than panicking, then it won't have any effect at all!

TBH this year I ran 7 times over BE courses at unaffiliated events because I a)did not have to register with BE, b)paid similar or lower entry fees, c)they had fairer waitlist/refund policies and d) I won significantly better value prizes. I know not everyone has this option and we are lucky round here, but I fully intend to start my season next year at unaffiliated - and interestingly all of the unaff I did help a waitlist whereas most of the BE I've done has taken entries right up until a few days before. Which goes to show that round here at least, people are voting with their wallets - and I do not blame them.

 

[avthechav]

Agree with Spotted Cat. Think first come first served is frankly ridiculous and that combined with the 'effectively buying slots' policy would mean that those with a string of horses can buy slots safe in the knowledge that they will get several runs at an event.

The first come first served thing wouldnt be so bad on its own if it wasnt coupled with it being easier to swap entries about. Bearing that in mind, I am hoping to move up to PN eventually and I would want to that on the back of a good run- however with the new system I may have to decide to do that several events in advance...

I think that this may just lead to even more grassroots riders being put off, this plus the fact that BDWP provides competition records for many unaff events and you can run unaff over lots of BE courses- wheres the incentive to join BE?

 

[oysterbay]

I think" first come, first served" caters for the multi horse rider. I usually wait until last minute when I know I have sound, fit horse, then use ballot stickers judicially. Interestingly, only one was 'used' this year, despite my inputting them each month - a sign of the times, I think.

Over the last 15 or more years, I (think I) have only been refunded twice. Once Gt Witchingham, a long time ago - very charming to deal with. Recently, without asking (I've given up), Llanymynech - much appreciated, thank you!

Is there any correlation between Llanymynech being BE rather than BDWP, or am I just cynical?

 

[Cazza263]

I don't think that there is too much wrong with the current ballot system tbh, the problem lies with the withdrawal/refund procedures.

First come, first served could work BUT ONLY if you could get a guaranteed 100% refund if you withdrew by a certain date (say 21 days prior to the event) as one horse amateur riders often don't firm up their plans until closer to the event when they see how things are going (as has been said before).

We have actually been very lucky so far this year as have had a very up and down season and have had to keep changing plans and have luckily been able to transfer classes every time we wanted to (although did have to run HC once as no open or U18 class to enter), but would have been pretty p..d off if we had effectively been forced to withdraw with no refund because we needed to change our plans - and on no occasion were our plans changed with less than two weeks' notice!

TBH I don't think the pros need the multi horse entry system (as point 9) because they usually have so many horses that they are effectively just buying slots anyway and frankly why shouldn't they pay an admin charge for substitutions - after all they could currently enter one horse (perhaps if it is off work or something) using a ballot sticker with every intention of running a completely different horse for which they have already used the current month's ballot sticker, just so that they guarantee the entry! I could, however, see the system benefitting amateurs with 2 or 3 horses competing at the same level but who perhaps only want to run one or two at an event but don't want to decide which horse/s to run until nearer the time. I don't really think that it would have a negative effect on one horse amateurs providing that there is a fair entry/ballot system in the first place.

 

[SusieT]

First come-first served would I guess mean that the entries need only open 3 weeks before an event as there would be no need for a ballot.

 

[Cazza263]

First come-first served would I guess mean that the entries need only open 3 weeks before an event as there would be no need for a ballot.

Good idea! If entries didn't open till 3 weeks before the event and were only open for say one week it wouldn't really be much different to the current timescale for secretaries would it?!

 

[Honey08]

I agree with Spotted cat too.

I started out as a full member of BE. I can only do a max of one event a month, so used my ballot stickers. For Somerford Park, which gets busy, I used my superballot. I didn't get in. I fail to believe that every single rider, in the class I entered, used their superballot too!

The following year I decided that there was no point in joining, as I'd only done five events the previous year. So I did day tickets and saved myself quite a bit of money.

For the last two years I've not competed due to injury, but have been with a friend to watch her at various unaffiliated ODEs in my area, and they weren't bad at all, and cost an average of £30 to enter. So next year, when I start competing again, I will probably do mostly unaffiliated. Especially if this first come first served comes in - I work away from home, all over the world, and am not always able to use the internet, so I'd miss out.

BE doesn't give a stuff about the little people.

 

[diggerbez]

i don't understand what is wrong with the current system of balloting? i think in the past it was more of an issue but this year i've been entering popular events REALLY late, without stickers and getting a place no problem- have BE not realised that there isn't the same demand anymore because everybody is totally broke?

agree with all the others who said that its the withdrawals/refunds system that needs looking at- i enter as late as i can to avoid getting stung by the above.....

 

[Morganlafaye]

BE are shooting themselves in the foot.

Grassroots riders are their cash cow. If they change the rules to a first come, first served model, what's the incentive to pay a ton of money for membership and season tickets to ensure you get in to your local events? None!!

I'll be eventing on a ticket next year if they change the rules in this way. I only joined because I tried twice at the end of last year to enter local events on a ticket, and was balloted both times. This year, with my ballot stickers, I've got in even though both events balloted again.

I too think it's the withdrawals procedure that needs looking at. I had to withdraw from one event, and even though I had a vet certificate, and I'm pretty sure I was replaced, I got no refund.