Time For A Change?

[poplarman]

In the heat and humidity of Hong Kong does anyone agree with me that it's time for a change in the system of ranking horse & rider to represent us in 2012.

The Whittakers, Nick Skelton and Tim Stockdale looked exactly what they are - chubby, unfit, old men.

Yes, they lead the rankings, and so they should given the backing that their fame and fortune brings to them. But there are many young riders who could beat them out of sight given the right horse pairings.

Let's hope the Olympic Committee can have sufficient influence to make the right changes.

 

[cruiseline]

No contest, agree 100%, its time for change!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Sarah_Jane]

Sorry but they are at the top of the rankings because they produce the best horses to the very top and consistently win the big prizes.

 

[skewbaldpony]

Alternatively, maybe they should be dropped from the side if they don't shape up. Ian Millar is older than all of them and looked in good shape.
Compo Clegg and Foggy need to stop lifting pints and start lifting weights.

 

[cruiseline]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry but they are at the top of the rankings because they produce the best horses to the very top and consistently win the big prizes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is it that they have the best horse!!!!! Perhaps because owners know that the selectors will chose them to go to the internationals, regardless of whether they are having a good or bad day, or if they have been in the gym or the bar. That has just been proven by the Olympic fiasco. After all it is the owners that pay the bills and want international recognition for their horses, I should know!!!!!!!

 

[flatcoat2]

I am not sure why you know but perhaps you are an owner or can influence them to realise that it would be a long term investment not a quick fix.
I know as well as anyone the ups and downs of having horses and being disappointed and desolate at times. There is no guarantee they won't go lame etc. but please can we find some brave owners as well as selectors and management.
Do we really want to repeat this at our own Olympics?

 

[no_no_nanette]

So agree, and Ben Maher's fantastic round on Rolette was a real endorsement of the need for change, and to bring in some of the younger riders. Think about the amazing achievements of our pony showjumpers, who will be/are moving up to horses - there are a lot of really outstanding young riders now who need to be given the backing of owners and sponsors. Is it pure coincidence that the two "late additions" to the eventing and SJ teams were the ones who performed best in the end?

Yes, cruiseline, time for a change, and if only our equestrian team had done as well as the rowers and cyclists!!! Dream on ...

 

[Ezme]

The pick who they think will do the best based on recent results. The older blokes are still up there so why shouldn't they be on the team? Geoff billington dissappear for years (appart from commentating at olyimpia) from the very top but now look at him in the last two derbys. Younger riders are coming through, but they've gota get the consistancy of the "big" boys. lol

 

[xcgirl]

totally agree-I didn't see Nick Skelton's round live but just saw it in the highlights programme and was actually really suprised how chubby and unfit he looked-didn't look like an athlete at all. Our best round came from our youngest rider, I know it's down to who has the best horses but surley something has to change, even if it'sjust the old boys going to the gym a a bit more!

 

[TarrSteps]

It would be interesting to know how big a part fitness played in the last few days. It is true both Mark Todd and Ian Millar have made a great deal out of how much they have been working out in preparation for these games and how difficult it is to stay in shape now that they're older. Then again, this effort has come from them not some team directive so it's hard to say whether it could be legislated or not.

I'm not sure age is an issue but I think fitness is. I know the Americans make a great deal about it, with George (the fitness fanatic everyone loves to hate

) at the forefront of the "riders are athletes crowd".

(As an aside, by the way, where are all those people on here who periodically ridicule the traditional American Equitation system? McLain and Laura are ex-Eq stars, the Maddens and HUGE Eq trainers and George, well he's George.

Will is, I believe, of the California/Jimmy Williams school but same basic idea. Looks like it worked out okay for them today.

)

The margins are narrowing. Everyone has access to the best breeding now. World travel has made it possible for more people to get international mileage and some of the biggest shows in the world are not even in Europe now. It's also made it possible for people to get training from the best, whatever their nationality. It's not enough just to have a "horsey culture" anymore, although it's still a HUGE advantage. "Small things" like fitness and refined selection and training procedures will play a bigger and bigger part as the field levels out.

 

[xspiralx]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry but they are at the top of the rankings because they produce the best horses to the very top and consistently win the big prizes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Quite. Many of our younger riders are by no means short on horsepower, so I don't know where that idea is coming from - its not like they are terribly disadvantaged in that way. Michael and John are still absolute masters at what they do, and that is why they were selected. Tim has also put in a sterling performance.

We have done badly mostly through bad luck, having to go down to our reserve, and then down to 3 riders - not because our riders weren't good enough. If we had sent a team of young riders and had done badly would you all now be castigating the selectors for taking a team without enough experience?

I am sure come the next Olympics, the selectors will again do their best to pick the team most capable of bringing home a medal for us, whether they are all 50 or 20.

 

[JM07]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry but they are at the top of the rankings because they produce the best horses to the very top and consistently win the big prizes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, if they ARE supposedly the best we have, then i'm not surprised we are no better than 6th grade.......

 

[AmyMay]

TarrSteps, what is American Equitation system??

 

[cefyl]

The USA has an excellent system of training young riders, most notabley the series of qualifiers nationwide culminating in the ASPCA Maclay finals.

This is for riders under the age of 18 yrs. They are required to show their horse at walk, trot, and canter, plus jump a round consisting of at least 8 fences of 3' 6" high. This is not a show class, but the riders are judged on their ability to control and guide the horse, and their position in the saddle on the falt and over fences, and their guidence of the horse.

The standard is exceptionally high. George Morris is a noted trainer, he is a stickler for the perfect balance and position of the rider over a fence. The riding is smooth, even paced, a lovely rhythm is established around a course.

Unlike the UK were we see juniors hauling ponies at high speed around a course with half a tack shop in the ponies mouth and hanging off it's body. In the USA you most often see a D ring or full cheek jointed snaffle, cavesson, sometimes a standing martingale, and maybe at the finals a double bridle or two.

This type of style is really the way most young riders in the USA start off if they ride "English" (as opposed to Western) even if they are not competitive. As this article (link below) says so many famous riders have started in this way by winning the Maclay cup. And now Maclain Ward has got his Olympic Gold, Mclain being another past Maclay cup winner (although he is not for obvious reasons the most popular name on the cup!), as is Laura Kraut.

http://www.horsesdaily.com/news/showjumping/2003/06-26-metropolitan.html

 

[Ciss]

Cruiseline and Tarr_Steps: Couldn't agree with you more.

We need a training and selection system that supports developing talent in both humans and equines and although the Equine Development Programme of the BEF (from foals up to potential international horses of 7/8 in all disciplines) is already paying dividends, the World Class Performance programme (especially in showjumping) seems sometimes unable to cope with the developing world class level talent of the younger entry below them.

When you see the great strides that the cyclists and swimmers -- and even the gymnasts and the track and field athletes and of course the rowers and sailors -- have made since Athens and compare it with the results the equestrian team has got so far in Hong Kong (yes, I know we didn't even qualify an sj team for Athens so I suppose getting there was at least an achievement) and more importantly, the number of personal bests our other teams have achieved, one does have to come to the conclusion that the whole upper level (national team and selectors) attitude of the showjumpers to training, sports psychology and human fitness needs a very thorough overhaul. This is not so much the case with eventing (probably because the UK is the main training base for almost all of the teams except those from NA so they are aware how importantly these factors are regarded in the rest of the world) or in dressage (in which -- as is the case with most countries --most of the successful riders are either based in Germany or train with Kyra where the same priorities are drilled into them all the time) but it is certainly true of the showjumping Olympic development programme.

When the Lottery funders come to the BSJA to ask them why the team performance was so poor, answers such as 'the horse wasn't right on the day' will not wash. They will know that horses are fragile animals (after all a list of the non-starters that went to Hong Kong across all the disciplines is pretty conclusive evidence of than) but what they will want an answer to is:

1 Why was only one rider below 30 been selected for Hong Kong whe it was always known that the conditions would be extremely stressful in both physical and psychological terms and a high level of fitness plays an essential role in combating that?
2 What opportunities were given to younger and fitter riders to develop partnernships / gain high level international competition (eg European champs etc) with horses that will also be (hopefully) as fit and well as required for London 2012 and who could have had a dry run in Hong Kong ready for that (as many teams have and have still obtained outstanding results)?

3 What incentives will the BSJA / World Class Performance?/Potrential programmes provide for owners so that they can invest in placing top class Olympic-2012 horses long-term with potential younger riders to gain international experience rather than just using one of good 'ole boys to guarantee a high BSJA ranking as has been the case in the past?

4 How will they develop a mind set in the riders/teams so that they smile and congratulate the horse at the end of the round? This is very good PR too attrart viewers from other sports and I am surely not the only one to notice that the only team that seemed to do this naturally were the Canadians (especially Ian Miller, who is 61 years old yes but jumps with the attitude and fitness of someone half is age) although obviously the Norwegians and Americans smiled and congratulated each other (not the horses) when they finally won their medals.

Cruiseline, Tarr_Steps and I know that we are now breeding some top class showjumpers from world class bloodlines here (we see them with encouraging regu;arity at the Futurity and in the BSJA Young Horse Championships) but with more and more of them being sent abroad to jump and train from an early age never to return (good for the prestige of British breeding but less so for the Equine Development Programme) we have to address this whole issue pretty smartly to ensure that Greenwich does not become a real embrassment to us all :-(

 

[TarrSteps]

Eek! What have I started?

To be fair there are some serious issues with the current trends in Equitation, particularly below the elite level. George has been very outspoken in his disappointment that some people seem to have taken a great system, that successfully supplied the USET for decades, and have turned it into a dog and pony show, rewarding style over substance. As in every system, some people are prone to "if a little is good, more must be better" and trying to find ways around talent and doing the tough work.

That said, at the top end the courses are TOUGH and some of the tests are a lot to ask of teen agers - things like switching top four horses in the ring and riding a course with no warm up, possibly even without stirrups. There is a great deal of attention paid to the details - number of strides in a line depending on the horse, the next jump etc; smoothness of adjustments; jumping off various distances/paces etc. The kids who win the Finals - McLain, Ray Texel, Erynn Ballard - are pretty much professionals by that point and often step almost immediately into international GP competition. Many also do Young Riders so have some experience already of Team competition.

It is also, as Ciss makes reference too, a great showcase for top juniors. Yes, it takes money to show but one does not need a super competitive horse so much as a well trained and well ridden one. Owners and trainers watch these classes and know who is riding well, then use those kids on their Junior horses to train and sell them. So kids showing promise at 15 or 16 start to stand out not just because they have money but because they are riding well. Eric is almost the poster child for this system - he had NO family backing but I remember hearing about him when he was literally 14 or 15 and starting to get rides in the US. (Of course he's been a freakish talent since forever so perhaps not the best example!) Many of the classes award training bursaries or Team assessments to the top finishers as well. There is a new program that takes the top 10 or so kids on one standing list and gives them the opportunity to attend a "camp" with elite level coaches, managers, vets etc. to encourage them to be all around horsemen, not just riders.

I think the consensus in now a mixed approach is best. The top American kids often come to Europe to ride at big sales barns and get experience going in the ring on many different horses. A couple of UK jumping powerhouse scions - most notably some of the younger Whitakers, including William - have been to the US to do the Eq's. Many event riders spend some time in the Eq rings, including Waylon Roberts (Canadian actually), a Pan Am medalist at 19, who did the Jumper Eqs and also spent some time in the UK, riding, I believe, with either the Whitakers or Nick Skelton.

There are also increasingly "style" classes on the continent - a direct nod to the American system and often a prerequisite to moving up a class. As so often, good systems take the best of other successful systems and make it their own.

I will confess my snarky remark was directed at a recent thread on here of people finding not very good examples of Eq rides on You Tube and roundly bashing the system as ineffectual and far inferior to the British system. I was just having a moment of pointing out that different does not necessarily equal bad and that it's hard to judge a system without any first hand knowledge of it.

My bad.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread . . .

 

[MydnightShadow]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry but they are at the top of the rankings because they produce the best horses to the very top and consistently win the big prizes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do they actually produce these horses or are they produced by their owners, the grooms and the young riders studying with the top ones, and specialist dealers, then just competed by the big boys once at a sufficient level to be of interest to them.

Surely if the big boys were doing all the riding work needed on all these horses to get them to the top level then they would spend enough time in the saddle to be and look fit....

I have heard from a horse transport driver that they ride very little away from the competition ring, although I don't know if this is true....

 

[TarrSteps]

I think this depends a lot on the situation and the individual rider. A competitor who is on the road all the time is obviously not riding the babies at home and I'm surprised how many people send horses for training with "big names" without seeming to take this logistical fact into account . . .

I have an agenda so I'll not get on my soap box about it

but I do wish there was more credit for young horse specialists/producers. In most of the Continental countries it's a respected profession and no shame send a horse to a top rider or to get a horse from a respected producer - quite the opposite!

It's better here than in North America but even so, there seems to be a sense that young horse production is a "lesser skill" that any reasonably competent rider can do and/or that it "doesn't matter" in the long run. Since a recent study suggests that as much as 90% of success is based on production rather than genetics (not that genetics are unimportant, more that even the best genetics are worth nothing if the rest of the system is not up to scratch) it does make you wonder how many horses' elite careers cease to be a possibility in their first year of riding.

There is starting to be more recognition of this with the Pathway program but still, those are horses already with at least two or three years of riding on them . . .

 

[BBH]

I would agree with this, I don't think there is enough recognition for the producers of young horses who in many cases are better horsemen/woman than some ' names'. I sent my young horse to a 'name' and was disappointed to see his own rider doing all the work. But in hindsight i'm really glad because having seen him compete a five year old I am of the view that I wouldn't want him near any youngster of mine, not that he was/is a bad rider but that he's so competitive that rather than give the baby a confidence inspiring round he hammered her into making mistakes. Not what I would want for mine anyway.

 

[TarrSteps]

That is one of the major issues - the temperament to produce confident, skilled young horses is not always the same one that wins medals, particularly if you're not comfortable with an attrition system where it doesn't matter much if you lose a few good horses along the way.

Of course SOME people do both jobs well but it often does come down to a question of where one puts one's time, attention and interest.

Also, while young riders often have the time and motivation to give to young horses they don't always have the experience or foresight to avoid mistakes, strengthen weaknesses and preserve essential strengths in the horses. Many of the most successful systems not only teach people how to ride but teach people how to train - under experienced supervision - and don't always confuse great talent in one area with ability in the other.

 

[The Voice]

There are some fabulous producers of young horses and I would always put a young horse to one of these before deciding the next step as they will give you a honest opinion on what to do next.

As for the rest of the post, unless there are wholesale structure changes, class changes and a substantial amount of finance is injected into the sport where it is really needed and it makes it viable proposition for people (owners/riders/sponsors) to invest in horses, nothing will change. I think many people are living in cuckoo land.

 

[kerilli]

if either of the Whitaker's horses had been sound, we might all be singing a different tune. It was the horses, not the (allegedly unfit) riders who failed us, after all. if they'd both gone double clear (not an impossible dream) we'd be celebrating, not bitching. They are both master horsemen and I really don't think their ages have anything to do with it at all. I haven't seen a pic of Michael W recently, but i've certainly never seen John looking fat!
kind-of agree about Nick though...!

 

[TarrSteps]

To be fair, too, we have to remember this is only one competition, albeit a very high profile and emotional one.

This past week's results are certainly not indicative of the year's results/rankings. Germany leads the Super League (RIP Super League, btw), Great Britain is second, the USA fourth. Canada and Norway aren't even IN the Super League, being only third (eight competitions) and seventh (three competitions) in the regular FEI rankings.

Part of the problem might be that sometimes a Team has to choose between doing well across the year and pulling off one or two big ones, especially if it lacks depth. Olympic competition is a big deal because it's so important to funding and public perception but it's not the only factor and it's hard to say to riders that they shouldn't go to such and such a big show but stay home and wait for their chance. (The Canadians have no such worries - there's hardly any other big competition they can realistically get to, let alone get travel funding for!

)

 

[TarrSteps]

Oops - got it reversed. Canada is 7th in the FEI rankings, Norway 3rd. Even less indicative . . .