I am writing as a response to the commentaries, articles, Between Rounds columns, Letters to the Editor, and countless posts on the Chronicle website’s
Discussion Forum regarding the three-day event and its future.

This is a “hot-button” issue that has stirred emotional responses from all sides. I think it is time, however, to try and put a little dose of history and reality into the discussion, which I’m sure will rile many three-day purists. And I can understand that, as I was one until very recently.

The majority of the discussion is coming from two camps. The first (and by far the most vocal and organized) is the lower level event rider, who, accompanied by a handful of current top level riders and several very respected elder statesmen, long for the sport to remain as it is. Actually, they long for the sport as it was, because whether people are willing to believe it or not, the sport has already changed.

The second, admittedly smaller group, is comprised mostly of our current international event riders, coaches, owners and supporters. This group believes that we must, in order to stay competitive internationally (that being only one reason; I’ll get to other arguments later), forge ahead and master this new format. This group wants to continue what we’ve been doing pretty well for the last decade under the guidance of Captain Mark Phillips–namely, winning medals for the United States.

Back in 2000, the Olympic torch in Sydney had yet to be extinguished when word began to circulate that the FEI was considering radical changes to the sport. They ostensibly needed to appease International Olympic Committee members’ concerns that eventing was too dangerous, too expensive to run, and required too much land to stage.

Immediately upon hearing this threatening news, U.S. riders, accompanied by top U.S. eventing officials and supporters, began a very vocal campaign in support of eventing in its traditional format. The U.S. eventing leadership really led the charge of all the top eventing nations.

Personally, I felt passionate that riders following me should have the same opportunity that I just had competing in Sydney in one of the greatest tests in all of Olympic sport. It was incomprehensible to me that I perhaps had just competed in what was possibly the last Olympic three-day event as we knew it.

We were not going to let them change our sport without a big fight. I remember participating regularly on conference calls, writing letters to the IOC and FEI, talking to my fellow competitors, attending several meetings of the countless boards and committees on which I sat, all aimed at one thing: keeping the three-day event. Not just in the Olympics (as you will recall that exclusion from the Olympic Games was a real possibility), but in the Olympics in its full, traditional format.

Looking back on it, I have to wonder where was the support of the vocal group of folks we are hearing from now? Where were the petitions? The few of us fighting for the life of our sport then could have really used the backing. But at that time it was just an “elite” Olympic issue, not one that affected the masses–the sport surely wouldn’t be threatened beyond that, right? Wrong.

Battling The FEI

Every single person who loved the sport of eventing, not just the upper level riders with Olympic aspirations, should have had a chill run up their spine when they read the FEI’s 2001 document, “Future of Eventing.” It stated something to the effect that, “Over time, it is envisioned that the sport of three-day eventing will evolve into a CIC format