So what has British Eventing done wrong?

[ihatework]

I volunteer at both CC and BE and there is a real concern about the standard of competitors at these levels, the number of "watch this combination" requests coming from the dressage judges is rising. I was at a BE where someone managed to have a rotational horse fall at 80 cms!! There is a huge amount of "all the gear with no idea" to be seen. Just watching some competitors walking courses is frightening as it becomes very obvious they do not understand how to walk "stride distances".

The standard at times certainly is horrific. But I think it’s probably because the sport is becoming more accessible (which is good). What I would say, is I would rather these riders were horrific over BE type courses where they are safely built, have systems in place to deal with the consequences if needed, rather than buried away in the unaff of old. There has to be some level of peer comparison going on for under prepared riders/horses, because on the flip side I think the majority of combinations are at a far higher standard than they ever were

 

[TPO]

Yeah I mean I see elitism as people being rude or excluding others because they don't have a 400k Oakley and aren't on 6 figure horses kitted out in £££ gear.

I don't see it as elitist to expect people to be at a standard that means they ae as safe as they can be firing themselves at fixed fences.

Honestly <dons tin hat and ducks> a lot of people at 80/90 & poss 100 *shouldn't" be, that entry money would be much better spent on training both on and off the horse.

"Back in the day" there was pretty solid RC structure and people did have to be "good enough" to affiliate. Apart from funding BE with the entries I don't think 80 or possibly even 90 has been a great idea. It's almost too accessible (if you have money).

The "be kind" stuff also seems to mean that people shouldn't be told the truth. There's been some ??? videos and pictures on here over the years and when someone (not me, I'm not that brave so no axe to grind) has said anything it has not gone down well. In the instances that I can recall the "truth speaker" has genuinely been trying to save someone's neck/life.

I have no idea how it would be possible but I'd rather people had to ride "judged" rounds their first time at 80/90 before they were allowed to enter competitively. I know my bar for success is simply surviving but I've seen so many close calls on here and real life and I don't want go to that many events. I don't even understand the mentality of wanting to do xc when riders struggle to canter a balanced circle or adjust a stride. I'm the opposite from elite so I don't know what that makes it?

 

[Ambers Echo]

I just wouldn;t call genine safety concerns 'elitism'. I would call the dismissal of 80/90 as 'not proper eventing' and not worthy of being called BE, elitism. And logically that attitude makes the risks much higher too. How are you supposed to learn if you can't prepare over easier courses? Yes training matters but at the end of the day you never have the experiencing of XC riding in XC clinics. You just don't. Very few XC training courses - including Somerford - have undualting ground for example. And setting off round a course to jump 20 efforts in a row is a totally different experience to anything you get in training.

So if someone want to event, how do they learn. Like IHW I'd far rather they start wth BE80 with pro led course walks and on the day support from trainers whpo are FAB. I;ve learned loads from course walks and trainers at 80T level.

 

[TPO]

The combinations referred to in my post really don't need to br worrying about simulating XC riding or a clinic not being enough they need to learn to adjust a canter stride and meet a pole on the ground from the right stride.

So there is something wrong when those pairings are allowed out in course at 80/90/100 to wing it

 

[Ambers Echo]

I wouldn;t disagree but I don;t think that concern is elitist. Just safety conscious. I'd like junior SJ to have a style element because kids who treat their ponies horribly and fly round spurs flapping and yanking the ponies in the mouth to make tight turns often win. I don't think that is elitist either.

 

[Old school]

In Ireland the Eventing Ireland organisation has very long reaching and strict social media rules for members. So I need to be careful or I could be expelled from the organisation.
Due to their rules, I need to clarify that this is my personal opinion and in no way reflects the opinion of Eventing Ireland...

We have had an explosion of unaffiliated events. For 90cm and 100cm competitors/horses it is wonderful. A chance to have a run to fine tune your skills before going affiliated. However, the UA events are so smartly run, they are keeping customers and EI are losing out.

An example, in affiliated eventing that this weekend
the 90cm amateurs have dressage starting at 08:30. Last dressage amateur 90cm competitor is 09:42. Their SJ course will be ready 2pm most likely. Maybe a little earlier. Last year at same event the SJ surface was like the road. They will have to queue with all 90cm class entries to get their round in. Finally, last year at the same event competitors in the 90cm classes were still waiting to go XC after 7pm. No one is going to tolerate that level of organisation. Add journey times and it is could almost be a welfare issue on a hot day.

Personally, I think an event that can accommodate 300 entries, in a motorway accessible location, receiving just 138 entries, speaks very loudly that people are not happy to pay for affiliated eventing and take such a long day out.

I am curious as to where this will lead. Higher entry fees will push out the amateurs, thus placing a higher financial burden on the pros and their owners. If this occurs, some owners will also step away. Again placing a higher burden on those left in the pool. Given that our team was not great in their results in Tokyo, in both eventing and show jumping, I cannot see the tax payer wanting to hand over more funds. I wonder how it will all sort itself out.

 

[shortstuff99]

As a matter of interest, what level(s) were you thinking of entering at and what were the entry fees?

Was going to enter medium but at over 300 to enter plus fuel etc, way too much for me. If I had been doing the international classes then I probably would have done it.

 

[McGrools]

Running concurrently with the BE event? That's a very interesting development.

Very interesting. If i had a horse ready to go i’d be entering promptly x

 

[ycbm]

"Back in the day" there was pretty solid RC structure and people did have to be "good enough" to affiliate.

Sorry TPO, I don't think this is true. There was no requirement to be a member of a riding club to affiliate to event. It was just that when the lowest course was "Novice" at max height over four foot (includes brush), max width 7 feet or more, it was almost impossible to get a horse to jump fences of that size if you were completely incompetent.

The courses were also far less technical and you could, (and I did!), get away with pointing, kicking, and throwing your own heart over first if you were on a willing horse with a decent jump in them.

It's the lower heights that have allowed people who really shouldn't be on the course to have a go. As an old timer though, i think the problem there is not incompetent people having a go, that's completely up to them (and frankly for some, part of the thrill) , it's the need of the organisers' insurers not to pick up the bill if someone sues.
.

 

[Elf On A Shelf]

The more I read about BE the more it scares me. Literally anyone with any animal can do it. No restrictions (unless of course you don't finish your dressage or show jumping section). At least in racing trainers and jockeys have to have licences that are properly and fully assessed. Even Point To Pointing you have to have licences and that's the amatuer side of racing.

 

[TPO]

Sorry TPO, I don't think this is true. There was no requirement to be a member of a riding club to affiliate to event. It was just that when the lowest course was "Novice" at max height over four foot (includes brush), max width 7 feet or more, it was almost impossible to get a horse to jump fences of that size if you were completely incompetent.

The courses were also far less technical and you could, (and I did!), get away with pointing, kicking, and throwing your own heart over first if you were on a willing horse with a decent jump in them.

It's the lower heights that have allowed people who really shouldn't be on the course to have a go. As an old timer though, i think the problem there is not incompetent people having a go, that's completely up to them (and frankly for some, part of the thrill) , it's the need of the organisers' insurers not to pick up the bill if someone sues.
.

Sorry I worded that wrong. They didn't *have* to do RC first BUT there was a training structure there at levels lower than BE to get, well, training and experience. Going affiliated almost held a bit of prestige because you were "good enough" to go Novice iykwim having successfully "completed" RC.

I don't have the same knowledge about RC these days and it seems different clubs have different things. Out of the 4 RCs near me I know what ones are preferred by the "good" riders and what one has a much lower standards with regards to everything e.g. allows the riding of lame, sore horses and has the head of the club (the proper name escape me!) slag them off behind their backs but does nothing about it.

I guess that's allowed BE to offer the lower levels too because the RC pathway isn't the only way now iykwim?

Now people can get the "prestige" of going affiliated when they should still be training. Obviously also nothing stopping the same people going unaff and being the same danger to themselves and their horses. I just thought BE were supposed to be better at the "policing" side for safety etc.

I also find it hard to believe that the combinations that worry me XC were a pretty, harmonious picture in dressage and SJ.

I just made it up in my last post as I typed but the more I think on it the more I think my idea to have a judged event for everyone's first BE at 80 and 90 the more I think it's a good one (hark at me!). The dressage is judged anyway, the SJ is judged snd perhaps just a short additional comment if it was a controlled round or wild. Then FJ make a small note if their fence was met and cleared well.

Everyone can have a bad line or a flyer but if it's at every fence that the horse is jumping from a "bad" canter or consistently getting in too deep or standing well off that'll get picked up. Ot would take 2 additonalnsconds to report back too deep, stood well back, rider didn't have any influence over horse. Even a complete Novice can tell a nice smooth jump from one that was awkward. Again even the pros have bad rounds or bad fences but rarely a full course and ar 80/90 it might just identify those that don't meet a minimum score and need further training.

Of course nothing to stop those pairings going unaff over the same heights but you'd hope sense would kick in at some point and people would rather train to get better than say they are an "eventer" while risking their necks tearing across the country with zero control.

Not my neck so I really shouldn't care but it's really for the horses. I hate seeing strapped shut mouths with the rider removes the back teeth because they're a county behind over a fence.

 

[Tiddlypom]

It is scary. I've written for dressage and FJ'd for BE up to Intermediate level. Some combinations at the lower levels are terrifyingly unprepared.

Dressage judges do report certain combinations who they think will struggle for control on the XC. IME a steward then watches them on the SJ to see if they should continue. I don't know if SJ ever directly reports a combination as being not fit or safe for the XC? That would be an extra level of screening pre them being let loose over fixed fences.

 

[ycbm]

Not my neck so I really shouldn't care but it's really for the horses. I hate seeing strapped shut mouths with the rider removes the back teeth because they're a county behind over a fence.

Yes, I'd defend to the end a rider's right to risk their own neck, but unfortunately there are welfare implications for the horse. Agree with all the rest of this post as well.
.

 

[Ambers Echo]

I agree with all that - but don't then conclude BE should ignore the lower levels! Quite the opposite. The need to have safety protocols, standards and a progression structure with structured coaching and the 80T training events is all the more important to address that.

So BE is about quality and professionalism - at ALL levels.

 

[Old school]

If you want all of those observations, it will be very expensive. Of the 'mummy club' that I have seen at PC and EI, their first question will be 'is the FJ qualified to assess my child?'. If not, then their opinion does not matter. This then creates the tricky question of volunteer vs professional making a judgement. Maybe select one fence that is A B and C, and is in every height category and have a qualified coach and steward watch each competitor go across.

Here all of the underage riders must be signed off as being ready. I do think a line in the sand should be drawn that after a certain date all new over 18s should be assessed. But unfortunately, the litigation element of this possible solution is terrifying. In Ireland anyway....

 

[Wishfilly]

The more I read about BE the more it scares me. Literally anyone with any animal can do it. No restrictions (unless of course you don't finish your dressage or show jumping section). At least in racing trainers and jockeys have to have licences that are properly and fully assessed. Even Point To Pointing you have to have licences and that's the amatuer side of racing.

TBF there are height and age restrictions on horses, and age restrictions on riders.

I do wonder if it would be good to have more of a qualification for combinations to move up the levels, i.e. you have to be assessed as safe at BE80 before you can do BE90 and so on- perhaps a double clear at the level below to progress? I'm not sure how you assess the safety of someone before they go around an 80, though.

 

[shortstuff99]

There are MERs for 100cm and above, so you can't just enter a 100 or Novice willy nilly you do have to qualify at level below.

 

[Wishfilly]

There are MERs for 100cm and above, so you can't just enter a 100 or Novice willy nilly you do have to qualify at level below.

Yes, but equally you can just enter at 80/90 and no-one has any idea what your prep is/has been, and it might be better if there were some sort of qualifying process?

Although that would probably see a lot more people not bothering with BE.

 

[ihatework]

Yes, but equally you can just enter at 80/90 and no-one has any idea what your prep is/has been, and it might be better if there were some sort of qualifying process?

Although that would probably see a lot more people not bothering with BE.

To play devils advocate, what sort of qualification would you expect at 80/90 - this is entry level in its own right, small simple fences. 2 eliminations back to back, or 3 in any season and you have to go get assessed by an accredited BE trainer before you are allowed to enter again.

At some point the individual has to step up and be accountable.

 

[ester]

Driving you have to be checked as competent to compete at club level (which I would say would broadly line up with unaff) and then checked again to do national level (which runs novice to advanced and prob equivalent of going to a BE) the difference being in numbers needing to be competency checked by I guess they do it in other countries too, we just don’t have that culture.

 

[RachelFerd]

You can't competency check unaff levels, because it is run on an ad hoc and unregulated basis. BE has continued performance requirements which should be triggered by continued failure to complete events.

The problem we have, is that continued performance requirements or basic competency checks can't be regulated in a world where unaffiliated exists - because if people want to event and don't like the idea of having to meet CPReqs or risk having a BE steward have a polite chat with them about their lack of safety, they just go unaff instead. So round and round we go!

 

[Ambers Echo]

You can't competency check unaff levels, because it is run on an ad hoc and unregulated basis. BE has continued performance requirements which should be triggered by continued failure to complete events.

The problem we have, is that continued performance requirements or basic competency checks can't be regulated in a world where unaffiliated exists - because if people want to event and don't like the idea of having to meet CPReqs or risk having a BE steward have a polite chat with them about their lack of safety, they just go unaff instead. So round and round we go!

Exactly! BE offers a strategy to address safety fears. BE lowering the entry level is not the problem re safety.

 

[Wishfilly]

To play devils advocate, what sort of qualification would you expect at 80/90 - this is entry level in its own right, small simple fences. 2 eliminations back to back, or 3 in any season and you have to go get assessed by an accredited BE trainer before you are allowed to enter again.

At some point the individual has to step up and be accountable.

But equally, there are people on this thread saying they see riding that is detrimental to the welfare of the horse at this level. The fences are big enough that you could give a horse a career ending injury (fully accept they could do this to themselves in the field).

And yes, equally, anyone can go off and do the same thing unaffiliated, too.

I don't know what qualification you'd use to complete 80, but other horse sports do have a qualification structure in part to try and minimise risks to the horse.

 

[Squeak]

At the risk of slightly changing the current topic of conversation, I was musing over the weekend with petrol prices going up again that BE events would still be unaffordable despite BE's best efforts. Most of the other disciplines don't require you to drive as far to compete making it eventers who feel the sting of petrol more.

I was really impressed that they've reacted so quickly to the lack of entries but I fear that now the problem isn't even just the cost of the entry fee. Anything that BE has done to reduce entry costs has been counteracted by the increase in petrol. A days eventing is still hideously expensive unless you're very lucky and it's down the road.

 

[Red-1]

I was one of those who started at PN, which was 1.05, and enjoyed the fact that competing at BE meant you were capable of hefting yourself over some fair sized fences. It didn't feel like real eventing until Novice though. I loved the old fashioned rider frighteners, good for a photo.

Now, I wish they would do a 70cm class for me and my new horse! We did a training session at Epworth the other day, round the BE track (although we used the smaller fences) and even the 80cm fences looked huge to me now LOL.

I don't know what the answer is for BE.

 

[shortstuff99]

But equally, there are people on this thread saying they see riding that is detrimental to the welfare of the horse at this level. The fences are big enough that you could give a horse a career ending injury (fully accept they could do this to themselves in the field).

And yes, equally, anyone can go off and do the same thing unaffiliated, too.

I don't know what qualification you'd use to complete 80, but other horse sports do have a qualification structure in part to try and minimise risks to the horse.

Ah well then you're getting into the realm of the French et al systems where you have to pass a competency test to compete at all affiliated sports.

 

[RachelFerd]

And now Kelsall are putting on an unaffiliated which will clash with Cholmondeley Castle just down the road. I find it utterly stupid.

 

[Tiddlypom]

And now Kelsall are putting on an unaffiliated which will clash with Cholmondeley Castle just down the road. I find it utterly stupid.

Oh, FFS, that's ridiculous ?.

 

[RachelFerd]

Oh, FFS, that's ridiculous ?.

But of course, it doesn't clash with Cholmondeley Castle unaffiliated the week after.

Creating this whole sub-system of unaffiliated events which disrupt the core calendar is SO ANNOYING. SO SO ANNOYING.

 

[Wishfilly]

Ah well then you're getting into the realm of the French et al systems where you have to pass a competency test to compete at all affiliated sports.

Would that be such a bad thing?

And now Kelsall are putting on an unaffiliated which will clash with Cholmondeley Castle just down the road. I find it utterly stupid.

That does seem very unfair.