teapot
Well-Known Member
Basic entry limits makes sense.
I can see why people are wondering what GOBE gets you if for any over-subscribed event, you're never going to get a run.
So what has British Eventing done wrong?
- Thread starter Orangehorse
- Start date
Basic entry limits makes sense.
I can see why people are wondering what GOBE gets you if for any over-subscribed event, you're never going to get a run.
ihatework
Well-Known Member
It is to all intents and purposes (without any prizes either I think). It’s essentially a scheme where if an event is undersubscribed then they can fill those slots with unaff runners under BE banner. Great concept to make events viable for organisers - came in last year when events were woefully under subscribed and cancelling.
ihatework
Well-Known Member
It gets you nothing.
But then if you want something it’s only fair you pay! And the reality is, it will only be a small number of events that are oversubscribed.
Squeak
Well-Known Member
The problem is that people are already paying a lot of money to do a GO BE, they are paying! And you can get a guaranteed run, rosette, prize money and championship for less if you go UA.
ihatework
Well-Known Member
But they aren’t paying into the full BE infrastructure as they aren’t paying members. So they should IMO only be getting a run if there is space. And I completely appreciate that means unaff is more attractive to a lot of the market. You pay your money you take your choice. BUT I 100% support the concept of GOBE - it makes complete sense to me that if an event has capacity that they should be able to offer what is essentially an unaff slot, and ‘we’ as in BE members should support and welcome those competitors that do want to enter
lannerch
Well-Known Member
Clarify a lot of money? They pay I think £30 registration for Go Be , correct me if I’m wrong and that lasts the whole year. Historically only the early events get over subscribed so there will still be a lot of opportunities in the summer to enter and run.
Imo not a lot of money
TheMule
Well-Known Member
GoBE membership is free and the entry fee is less than a normal section at the equivalent level
lannerch
Well-Known Member
Wow , definitely more attractive imo than unaffiliated. Then do people realise if you get balloted out you do get your money back , because how have they in that case already spent a lot of money .
teapot
Well-Known Member
Free membership (There is a £10 run fee payable to BE for non-members to compete in GO BE classes - copy and paste from BE website)
Then an entry fee and start fee which seems to vary between events?
GoBE90 at Goring Heath - £76.38 and £15 start fee
GoBE90 at Bovington - £63.79 and £14.54 start fee
GoBE100 at Oxstalls - £76.55 and £17 start fee
GoBE100 at Solihull - £63.79 and £14.54 start fee
lannerch
Well-Known Member
Unaffiliated does not cost much less though and all the above is returned if you get balloted out. And unlike affiliated you can guarantee a standard and length of course.
Additionally affiliated I have always won or rather my horse has quite good prizes
ihatework
Well-Known Member
I just had a look at the entry fees for Cotswold cup. Most are in the £90’s inclusive of start fee.
So all in all pretty equivalent price wise.
Quite frankly I’d happily enter my horse in either GOBE or CC and my decision would be based purely on location and timings
teapot
Well-Known Member
Cotswold Cup entires are £70+, closer to £90 with start fee I think?
ihatework
Well-Known Member
Go have a look! You might be surprised
teapot
Well-Known Member
Just did and edited, so actually not a cheap day out at all!
ester
Not slacking multitasking
I think the issue is that we know early season ballots but this sort of scenario is then going to push people over to unaffiliated where they know if they enter early they will get a run rather than risking being balloted out and not then going to be able to get into any UA running at a similar time. So later in the season where 'top up' riders are needed to make things viable they will have already written GOBE off.
didn't thorseby do first come first served no ballot (given the consternation about the day/time it was chosen for entries to open)?
didn't thorseby do first come first served no ballot (given the consternation about the day/time it was chosen for entries to open)?
lannerch
Well-Known Member
But are there many UA running early season?
conniegirl
Well-Known Member
But the entire point is that BE wants to get people to move from UA to BE. Most of the riders at UA just want a good day out, they don’t give two hoots if x international rider has enough runs.
balloting rather than first come first served is the main cause of problems and why be will struggle to get people to switch.
you say there are other options but generally by the time people have been informed that they have been balloted all events at a similar time will have closed entries. They are unlikely to be able to get an entry in anywhere for around then.
i really don’t see what advantages BE membership or GoBE has for the member/person at the low levels?
ester
Not slacking multitasking
I guess it was less of an issue last year as they only got introduced later on in the season. It does seem to be an easy/sensible solution to only open up to GOBE after main entries/if there is then room.
lannerch
Well-Known Member
A guaranteed standard and length of course, guaranteed safety standards and clear rules . Trained officials , medical backup both for horse and rider and the backup of British eventing as a governing body. And probably a lot more I am either unaware of or forgotten.
conniegirl
Well-Known Member
Apart from the back up from BE, most UA events have all of the above.
medical cover for horse and rider is essential otherwise the event wont be able to get insurance.
heck last time i organised a show we couldn’t even get insurance for inhand showing without proper human medical services on site (not just someone with a first aid certificate) and a vet on call.
The training for BE fence judges (so officials) seems somewhat lacking from what a lot of people have said.
lannerch
Well-Known Member
I have been to shocking UA events in my time , flimsy jumps of varying dimensions and unfixed, poor organisation, short rock hard courses.
Even Kelsall last year somewhere that also runs affiliated so you would expect a standard ran the first UA event of the year I believe mainly just around one field and not the whole BE course , admittedly this was heavily criticised and later in the year they ran an UA over more of the course. But still is an example of how you cannot guarantee a standard UA.
Additionally affiliated should have a certain standard of judging which can be hit and miss in UA.
Last edited:
Ambers Echo
Still wittering on
You are literally making my argument for me! Real members are far more important but we will promote GOBE, take your money and if there is enough space, you can take part too…..
Or the other hand, you can enter UA, where you are equal to anyone else competing.
GOBE was set up to encourage newbies into the sport. I don’t think it’s successful at doing that. If it was sort of a Last.Minute.Com - pay a cheaper fee to take up spare spaces at late notice , then fine. But that is not how it’s being marketed.
ihatework
Well-Known Member
Im not making any argument other than calling a spade a spade AE. It is what it is! Don’t blumming enter it and go unaff if that’s what you prefer AE. I’m out.
I might even start using UI for a bit.
Ambers Echo
Still wittering on
I’m sorry I’m angering you so much. I respect and enjoy your posts. I’m not really sure what is so controversial about what I said though? I said that of course members needed to take priority in a ballot situation, questioned why balloting was used as opposed to -say giving members priority entry for a week or two. Or opening up classes in height order so higher classes filled first. And said I felt the GOBE class was misconceived, in my view, as it tries to compete with UA, but may make competitors feel less valued.
That’s not the same as telling people to go UA or being unfairly critical.
I actually think BE should stop chasing ‘have a fun day out’ people and instead focus on being a pathway for the whole sport, that people aspire to one day get onto.
But I’m also going to stop commenting on BE as positions feel very polarised and we are just winding each other up! Which is never my intention.
That’s not the same as telling people to go UA or being unfairly critical.
I actually think BE should stop chasing ‘have a fun day out’ people and instead focus on being a pathway for the whole sport, that people aspire to one day get onto.
But I’m also going to stop commenting on BE as positions feel very polarised and we are just winding each other up! Which is never my intention.
conniegirl
Well-Known Member
But you calling a spade a spade just backs up AE’s argument that for low level riders UA gives more choice, certainty of a run and doesn’t treat them as an pleb.
people don’t like feeling used, that is why GoBE will never replace UA.
Ignoring the financial backbone of the society and constantly treating them like they don’t matter is the reason BE is struggling for new members and ultimately why it is failing
ihatework
Well-Known Member
GOBE will never replace unaff I agree. It’s one one of two things
1. Have a go, see if you like it/might want to join in the hope newbies then register.
2. Pop a youngster on the wagon with the others you are competing and give it a training school.
It’s not and never should be:
Come and compete on equal terms to all our members who pay higher entry fees and full membership. That’s just utterly bonkers if you expect that.
1. Have a go, see if you like it/might want to join in the hope newbies then register.
2. Pop a youngster on the wagon with the others you are competing and give it a training school.
It’s not and never should be:
Come and compete on equal terms to all our members who pay higher entry fees and full membership. That’s just utterly bonkers if you expect that.
conniegirl
Well-Known Member
But that is what BE are trying to make it. The restrictions on venues running BE and UA makes that plain.
Number 1 won’t happen if they never get a run due to balloting or if thier first experience of BE is being balloted out.
but beside that the low level full members constantly bring balloted out in favour of higher level riders would makes you feel “why bother paying membership when i can just go UA and guarantee myself a run.”
BE needs to make itself more attractive to the lower levels and in that it is failing and IMO the balloting system is a large part of that.
Patterdale
Well-Known Member
I thought they were doing away with balloting in favour of first come first served, to avoid this very problem?
Why would they accept the entries if there was no space? Why have a system that allows that?
They’ve massively shot themselves in the foot here.
Why would they accept the entries if there was no space? Why have a system that allows that?
They’ve massively shot themselves in the foot here.
Squeak
Well-Known Member
I do think that the fundamental problem is that BE need the grassroots riders to pay for and prop up the sport but they put them at the bottom of the priority list (even if they are full members) and consequently they don’t offer them many benefits of being members.
It worked when their courses were far better than others and so GR riders were getting benefits from being a member but now when they're trying to get GR riders back to stop the UA's they really need to have something to offer them.
It feels like BE aren't being open and are covering up and lying about their priorities and motives, don't care about GR riders apart from their money, want to stop the UA's so that they can have the money from the GRs but not prepared to do anything to attract the GR riders.
GO BE is the perfect demonstration of all the above - BE did not clearly communicate that it was a way for events to fill their entries, to me from what I'd read in their promotional material it was their attempt to get the UA riders to compete at a BE instead of supporting UA's and riders did support them only to find out that they're now not getting a run, which I completely get IHW and other's opinions that why would you let non members run instead of members, but that should have been made very clear to those entering and now there's bad feeling over it. Go BE's end up costing exactly the same to enter for a non member, a member and as a UA but for GO BE the horse gets no rosette, no prizes and no championship qualification.
It's interesting because the feelings and opinions on here are fairly clearly split between those competing at GR and those competing above. We all love the same sport and yet the views and opinions are so completely polarized.
It worked when their courses were far better than others and so GR riders were getting benefits from being a member but now when they're trying to get GR riders back to stop the UA's they really need to have something to offer them.
It feels like BE aren't being open and are covering up and lying about their priorities and motives, don't care about GR riders apart from their money, want to stop the UA's so that they can have the money from the GRs but not prepared to do anything to attract the GR riders.
GO BE is the perfect demonstration of all the above - BE did not clearly communicate that it was a way for events to fill their entries, to me from what I'd read in their promotional material it was their attempt to get the UA riders to compete at a BE instead of supporting UA's and riders did support them only to find out that they're now not getting a run, which I completely get IHW and other's opinions that why would you let non members run instead of members, but that should have been made very clear to those entering and now there's bad feeling over it. Go BE's end up costing exactly the same to enter for a non member, a member and as a UA but for GO BE the horse gets no rosette, no prizes and no championship qualification.
It's interesting because the feelings and opinions on here are fairly clearly split between those competing at GR and those competing above. We all love the same sport and yet the views and opinions are so completely polarized.
ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
It's a very clear split, isn't it? Those at the top or aiming for the top levels (the old BE heights) need the money from the lower levels to have the top heights to aim at.
Yet seem disconnected and disinterested in the feelings of those "just want a good day out" competitors who are financing their sport.
.