PDA

View Full Version : Jump from Training to Prelim



Janet
Dec. 27, 2007, 03:46 PM
In the article about the annual convnetion says "The jump from training to preliminary demands not only the most substantial increase in height and speed but technical difficulty as well."

This statement was repeated several times during the convention.

But that just isn't the case.

The jump from Training to Prelim is 4 inches- the same as the jump from Beginner Novice to Novice, and the same as the jump from Novice to Training. So it is not "the most substantial increase"

If you look at the top end of the speed range,
the jump from BN to N is 50 mpm
the jump from N to T is 70 mpm
the jump from T to P is 50 mpm.
So it isn't "the most substantial increase" there either.

If you look at the bottom end of the speed range,
the jump from BN to N is 50 mpm
the jump from N to T is 70 mpm
the jump from T to P is 100 mpm.
So there it IS "most substantial". But I would expect any rider planning to move up to Prelim would be riding their training courses at 470, not 420.

It IS true that Prelim is the first level at which your cross country speed is significanly higher than your show jumping speed, so you DO need to learn to "jump at speed". But it isn't the "biggest increase". And most people who move up to Prelim are not trying to "make time" on their first ouiting.

The bit about being more technical IS very true.

But to say "The jump from training to preliminary demands not only the most substantial increase in height and speed..." is just plain NOT TRUE.

Hilary
Dec. 27, 2007, 04:13 PM
Thank you for posting this Janet -

I was also struck by the tone of the article. That having a "professional track" at Prelim & up was a fantabulous idea, endorsed by all and was the toast of the convention.

Um. No. What about the polls taken here and on the Eventer's L list, and by area adult rider representatives where us amatuers loudly said "No! Please don't put us in the corner and tell us we're not good enough. One track is fine, and if someone isn't up to the challenge, well they aren't up to the challenge, but don't segregate us like the poor relations."



Or am I over-reacting?

flutie1
Dec. 27, 2007, 04:14 PM
"... And most people who move up to Prelim are not trying to "make time" on their first outing."

Nor should they. Often though, this is not the case and the results are hairy as hell.

These are interesting stats, Janet. Psychologically, however, I believe that the jump from a canter to a hand gallop (as in Novice to Training) is a hell of a lot more "doable" to the neophyte than the jump from a hand gallop to a gallop (as in Training to Preliminary). Bringing us to the question - do first time Preliminary riders practice what a real gallop, NOT a hand gallop, feels like - practice it enough to feel comfortable?

... and combining technical and speed opens a whole other can of worms.

Lots to think about.

kacey'srider
Dec. 27, 2007, 04:16 PM
Just curious, Janet - What is the difference in spread of fences between the levels?

Janet
Dec. 27, 2007, 04:20 PM
Just curious, Janet - What is the difference in spread of fences between the levels?

Top spread
the jump from BN to N is 6"
the jump from N to T is 8"
the jump from T to P is 8"

deltawave
Dec. 27, 2007, 04:22 PM
Hee hee, when I read the article just yesterday I thought to myself "I wonder who will do the math and post a rebuttal on COTH". :lol: My vote would've been with Janet. :)

I agree there is a HUGE difference between Training and Prelim speed. At least on my horse, Training speed was easy and even my slowpoke youngster can do 420mpm EASILY and in control. But putting a WHOLE COURSE (including all those technical fences!) together at or above 520mpm is HARD. There are parts of the course where you have to (or SHOULD) slow RIGHT down, meaning that if you hope to make the time you're pushing 550-600mpm elsewhere on the course.

Janet
Dec. 27, 2007, 04:25 PM
I was also struck by the tone of the article. That having a "professional track" at Prelim & up was a fantabulous idea, endorsed by all and was the toast of the convention. It was very clear at the convention that it was NOT an "amateur track" vs a "pro track".

It was a (horse OR rider) "moving up to this level for the first time" vs (horse AND rider) "confirmed at this level."

The PROS REALLY WANT the "moving up to this level for the first time" courses for bringing horses up the levels.

I actually like the idea of having REAL corners at Training height, as an alternative to "wedges" at Training height, and so on.

sharri13
Dec. 27, 2007, 04:35 PM
Hilary - I totally agree with you! My vote was a strong NO to the Prof. vs Am. track.

What was the final verdict at the convention? Are we going to have two tracks at Preliminary?

My concern was safety: riders cruising around the Preliminary Am. track and thrilled to move up to Intermediate. Will they truly be prepared for Intermediate?

Janet
Dec. 27, 2007, 04:37 PM
Hee hee, when I read the article just yesterday I thought to myself "I wonder who will do the math and post a rebuttal on COTH". :lol: My vote would've been with Janet. :)
I bit my tongue at the meeting, but I couldn't keep it up when they put it in print. They said some pretty ignorant things about motor racing licenses too, but I kept my mouth shut.


I agree there is a HUGE difference between Training and Prelim speed. At least on my horse, Training speed was easy and even my slowpoke youngster can do 420mpm EASILY and in control. But putting a WHOLE COURSE (including all those technical fences!) together at or above 520mpm is HARD. There are parts of the course where you have to (or SHOULD) slow RIGHT down, meaning that if you hope to make the time you're pushing 550-600mpm elsewhere on the course. Actually, more than that. IIRC one or more of the BNTs put a gps watch on a student going Prelim. A sensible looking ride that came in about 10 seconds under time. The GPS showed a maximum speed of 790 mpm. Not clear if that was instantaneous, or sustained for more than a few seconds. But yes, you have to go MUCH faster in places to make an average of 520.

Yes, I agree speed is an issue in the move up to Prelim. But it isn't, objectively, mathematically, "the most sunstantail increase".

Janet
Dec. 27, 2007, 04:39 PM
Hilary - I totally agree with you! My vote was a strong NO to the Prof. vs Am. track.

What was the final verdict at the convention? Are we going to have two tracks at Preliminary?

Still under investigation


My concern was safety: riders cruising around the Preliminary Am. track and thrilled to move up to Intermediate. Will they truly be prepared for Intermediate? No intent to permit that. The "move up to Prelim" tracks would NOT count as "qualifying for Intermediate" according to anyone I heard or spoke to.

Hilary
Dec. 27, 2007, 04:59 PM
OK, I feel better. I guess I jumped all over the endorsement of the idea by the "professional horsman's council".

Thank you Janet, for seeing more clearly! (and posting all those numbers).

I dunno about the speeds. One of my prelim horses had one speed -500. We racked up lots of speeding tickets at Training because of it, but never quite made the time at Prelim. She had been there, done that and that was her comfortable speed.

My other horse easily made Training time, and I never really pushed him at Prelim and we usually had time faults, but he was not easy to ride, and I tried to be safe, not fast.

I didn't see the issue as the speed required, but with my horse. Had he remained sound, I'm pretty sure we could have sorted out the steering and brakes that made making time difficult.


While the jump in inches is not bigger than differences between Novice & training, jumping at 3'6" requires a lot more of the horse, and the margin for error is smaller.

I read an article about hunters, in which the question was posed, why are there so many fewer competitors in the 3'6" and up classes.

The response (by GM himself) was that the athleticism required from the horse to fix a bad spot or mistake in a 3'6" course is significantly greater than that required to get out of a sticky situation at 3'. Same goes for rider skill- you need to be a better rider at that height, and that difference is the big one.

You don't have those problems when you move to 3'3" because more horses and riders are able to squeak out of a problem.

annikak
Dec. 27, 2007, 05:26 PM
(not that I have ridden prelim this year...)

but the move to Prelim was a biggie for me, and as far as my horse goes, I think he thought so too.

This is what I got as an answer to my query- At 3'6" and above, it's the first time that the horse actually has to move their body mass off the ground- IOW, at 3'6", they have to make an effort for the first real time. Yes, jumping is an effort at all times, but below 3'6", they just have to get their legs outta the way. IIn looking at my pictures, it seems as if that is pretty on target. Now, I know that horses like Teddy make that not as true, but for the average 16. hh horse, it seems pretty much on target.

And as someone said today, any goat can jump 3'~! Don't know if that's true- but it made me laugh!

adding to what Hillary said above, it also comes up a lot quicker at 520 (or faster as it has been said before in this thread) then it does at 400. So, you'd have better polished up and getting some good muscle memory going to help at those "Oh Sh*t" moments.

purplnurpl
Dec. 27, 2007, 05:48 PM
"... And most people who move up to Prelim are not trying to "make time" on their first outing."

Nor should they. Often though, this is not the case and the results are hairy as hell.

do first time Preliminary riders practice what a real gallop, NOT a hand gallop, feels like - practice it enough to feel comfortable?

... and combining technical and speed opens a whole other can of worms.

Lots to think about.

I think that is the very issue. Are people just not thinking? If people would do their homework before taking the test maybe results would be better.

Shoot forget 470, run your last two Trainings at 490. Just slow enough not to get speed penalties.

And with speed. I don't know. Not keeping an eye on speed [to me] is no different then say...not putting your horse into a frame for dressage. If you are a competitive type you'll watch it all. Go as fast as you can without being unsafe. Don't cry about it if you don't make time, but don't go out there and lolly gag around at Training level speed.

They are all components of competition. Why would you leave one out?

For gosh sakes. just do homework! and make sure it is done correctly. They make schooling shows for these very purposes.

my question is, if people get out there and they see that they are over faced why don't they just pull up? And if they are over faced and don't know it, who the heck is letting them gallop out of the box in the first place?

these questions just go around and around in circles. This issue doesn't seem to have anything to do with the issues we've been having. As the accidents have been mostly with pros.
So are are we really talking about?

Janet
Dec. 27, 2007, 05:52 PM
Shoot forget 470, run your last two Trainings at 490. Just slow enough not to get speed penalties. You can run Training at 519 without getting speed penalties. Speed penalties start at 520.

Horseless1
Dec. 27, 2007, 05:56 PM
I know that for me the jump to Prelim has always mentally been the big one (and I've yet to make that leap :)) But I would hate to see the two tracks. I was hoping they could address some issues with better descriptions of the courses or a difficulty scale - instead of the "average for horses with experience..."

The article also mentioned the idea of subjective XC judging - eeek! There's a reason I don't do hunters. I understand the intent here, but this seems like a nightmare. (Which jump(s) do they judge? Is this part of your score? Does a less-than-stellar student of an Olympic trainer get the benefit of the doubt while Suzy Backyard Rider is deemed unknowledgeable?)

Kcisawesome
Dec. 27, 2007, 06:12 PM
Hmm, I find this quite interesting. I just made the jump to Prelim (I've done one prelim) And I guess I felt that it was about like the jump to training from novice. The main difference I noticed was not time/height/technicalities But just what you can get away with. At Training You can come by just fine with bad spots to jumps and being some-what out of control. But at Prelim, presision starts to become VERY important....not just to your score, but to you and your horses welfare.

I personally do not like the idea of having more than one track prelim...If we must make another level, than make another level. I personally did a few HARD trainings and then did an EASY prelim for my first time out. The XC jumps were very similar to training jumps I had already did, just a couple tighter turns, a couple xtra jumps and everything was 2 inches higher.

I think that for the person looking to do things right, there are plenty of options already. And for those who are taking dangerous shortcuts, there are already rules in place about dangerous riding. Lets enforce them.

Star67
Dec. 27, 2007, 06:19 PM
The move up from Training to Prelim is a big one ... no doubt about that. It would be a shame to see two tracks. There is no requirement to make the time ... therefore, the most important factor is being able to handle the height and technicality of Prelim. If you are having stops at Training ... take the time to figure that out ... if you are successful at Training, then start schooling the Prelim stuff and see how it goes. I believe everyone knows their own horse the best ... listen to what you "hear" and don't overface him ... once confidence is destroyed it is hard to rebuild. Once you are established jumping wise, it will be easier to make the time as well. My horse is very established at the Prelim level and I still find it challenging at times to make the time, more because of his stride than anything. However, I won't let this hold me back from competing at the Intermediate level if I feel he is capable of jumping the jumps and handling the technical aspects of an Intermediate course. I figure I can always go faster as I(he) gain more experience at a level. I personally feel that getting to Prelim was harder than my next move up to Intermediate. I have such a relationship with my horse that the next move is a no brainer ... but I hesistate to take my OTTB out Novice ... he is still figuring out where to put his feet and although he can jump the moon ... he's still so green ... I can't depend on him the same way.

Snapdragon
Dec. 27, 2007, 06:36 PM
I guess I'm going to be unpopular and say I don't see a real problem with a two-track system. If you're just moving up, you normally would try to do a "move-up" course first. By labeling it as such, it seems many would know exactly what they were getting into (I'm assuming certain concrete criteria would be attached to that label), which would alleviate the problem of course descriptions as "average for horses at this level."

But, again, I'm not exactly sure how the powers that be are envisioning this!

Badger
Dec. 27, 2007, 06:46 PM
Is the whole "track" thing as simple as identifying a group of "qualifying courses" that any prelim rider can enter, just like all the other prelims, but are seen as good prep-runs for moving up to intermediate? And instead of saying a rider can qualify from running any four prelims, they want to narrow the qualifying requirements to the move-up ones?

That doesn't seem like a separate track at all. It's what people should be doing already at all levels: starting out at the softer courses when they are new to a level, then going and finding the more challenging events and running those as they prepare to move up.

This whole amateur vs. professional track may just be a case of semantics or poor marketing. A lot of us on the board have said we'd love to see some sort of rating of tracks, and that sounds like what this may be doing by default.

Not all prelim tracks (or training tracks, or novice tracks) are created equal. The smart and responsible rider picks and chooses easier courses when they and/or their horse is new to a level, and once confirmed finds tougher, more challenging tracks to best prepare them for a move-up to the next level.

If the USEA is now going to give us additional, helpful information by identifying WHICH specific course are considered move-up preps, more power to 'em. I'd like to see this at all levels, not just prelim. And I have no problem with the requirement that the rider goes clean over the tougher prelim courses before they move to intermediate. It makes sense to me.

I come to this after an initial, knee-jerk response to the whole "ammy track" idea, thinking it's awful and un-eventer-like and unAmerican and ammy-insulting and all that. But I think really what my initial objection to is the semantics, and if I'm right about what's really being proposed, that it DOES make sense. As an ammy who is now technically qualfied to move-up to intermediate and knows I'm woefully unprepared to actually do so (not mention that I never plan to, prelim is quite challenging enough, thank you very much), I'm picking and choosing prelims in what I hope is a progressively more challenging path. If the USEA were to go so far as to make a small selection of tougher prelims "qualifiers" then I might have that as an eventual prelim goal, to someday compete at that level, but to avoid them like the plague until I'm confirmed enough to be there.

As far as the jump from training to prelim, I definitely think it's a bigger jump than any of the others. At prelim, you can see all the questions and types of obstacles that you see at intermediate and advanced, so the technicality is greater than has been seen before. It's the first time that making speed is an issue (below that, speed penalties are often an issue). At this level, I'm trying to go as fast as I can and still feel safe, where at training and below I'm rating my horse to a certain rhthym and holding that speed: at prelim for the first time I'm landing and urging him on. And as was said above, it's the point where a horse needs to really jump and not just canter over the obstacle getting their legs out of the way.

purplnurpl
Dec. 27, 2007, 07:58 PM
Is the whole "track" thing as simple as identifying a group of "qualifying courses" that any prelim rider can enter, just like all the other prelims, but are seen as good prep-runs for moving up to intermediate? And instead of saying a rider can qualify from running any four prelims, they want to narrow the qualifying requirements to the move-up ones?


if this is the case then Area V will have to do away with all of it's Intermediate tracks. There are in area people that run Prelim and Inter here. People that never leave the area. Without them the ULs would not fill. Already Inter only pulls about 5-6 riders. 10 on a really lucky day.
We only have 5 HTs (3 of them having Inter courses).
That would be a shame.

I predict nothing will change.

Beam Me Up
Dec. 27, 2007, 08:17 PM
No intent to permit that. The "move up to Prelim" tracks would NOT count as "qualifying for Intermediate" according to anyone I heard or spoke to.

Janet, could you explain this a bit more? Would one qualify at training to move up to "move up/ammy prelim," and qualify there for "regular prelim"? (In other words, are we adding a level between training and prelim?)

Or is it more like some prelim tracks will not be qualifying for CCI*/int, but your 4 qualifying training s will qualify you for any type of prelim?


It seems to be what is (rightfully) offending a lot of people is calling the easier tracks "ammy tracks." If we have the entrants/facilities to run 2 tracks of prelim, why stigmatize one of them with a name like that?

RealityCheck
Dec. 27, 2007, 09:24 PM
"But I would expect any rider planning to move up to Prelim would be riding their training courses at 470, not 420."

I agree with you wholeheartedly on this, however in my experience (mostly in area 8, however also dabbling in 2, 3, & 4) the majority of training events set the optimum speed at 425 or 450. Why the typically harder courses don't bump the speed up to 470, I'm not sure, but the reality is that sometimes being closest to optimum time means the difference between 1st and 2nd place, and when you're in that situation aiming for optimum time looks like a pretty darn good idea! Should riders who are planning to move up soon sacrifice a higher place for the experience of galloping at a higher speed? Absolutely. Is this likely to happen in the increasingly competitive atmosphere where places are seperated by tenths of a point? Unfortunately, probably not.

Janet
Dec. 27, 2007, 09:57 PM
Janet, could you explain this a bit more? Would one qualify at training to move up to "move up/ammy prelim," and qualify there for "regular prelim"? (In other words, are we adding a level between training and prelim?)

Or is it more like some prelim tracks will not be qualifying for CCI*/int, but your 4 qualifying training s will qualify you for any type of prelim?


It seems to be what is (rightfully) offending a lot of people is calling the easier tracks "ammy tracks." If we have the entrants/facilities to run 2 tracks of prelim, why stigmatize one of them with a name like that?
First, I don't think anyone is calling it a "amateur track" anymore. The current term is "national track" and "CIC track"- though that is going to have to change to avoid confusion with real CICs.

It is all still in the talking stage, but I think you will need 4 qualifying rounds on the "harder track" to move up to the next level. So you would need 4 "qualifying rounds" at the "harder Training track" to move up to Prelim. But I EXPECT that could then chose whether you wanted to move up to the"easy Prelim" or the "harder Prelim".

But none of the details have been worked out, so it is just conjecture and "reading between the lines" on my part.

Janet
Dec. 27, 2007, 10:12 PM
That doesn't seem like a separate track at all. It's what people should be doing already at all levels: starting out at the softer courses when they are new to a level, then going and finding the more challenging events and running those as they prepare to move up.
No, they really are talking about new course design.

For instance, the "harder Training" track would include fences currently "not appropriate" for Training (e.g., 45 deg corners, zig zag over ditch, bull finch, bounce) but at NOVICE height.

Janet
Dec. 27, 2007, 10:13 PM
if this is the case then Area V will have to do away with all of it's Intermediate tracks. There are in area people that run Prelim and Inter here. People that never leave the area. Without them the ULs would not fill. Already Inter only pulls about 5-6 riders. 10 on a really lucky day.
We only have 5 HTs (3 of them having Inter courses).
That would be a shame.

I predict nothing will change.
I don't see how anything that is being proposed would prevent that.

RAyers
Dec. 27, 2007, 10:25 PM
First, I don't think anyone is calling it a "amateur track" anymore. The current term is "national track" and "CIC track"- though that is going to have to change to avoid confusion with real CICs.

It is all still in the talking stage, but I think you will need 4 qualifying rounds on the "harder track" to move up to the next level. So you would need 4 "qualifying rounds" at the "harder Training track" to move up to Prelim. But I EXPECT that could then chose whether you wanted to move up to the"easy Prelim" or the "harder Prelim".

But none of the details have been worked out, so it is just conjecture and "reading between the lines" on my part.

This is not aimed at you, Janet but to the world in general.

WHY THE HELL IS THE ANSWER TO EVERY PROBLEM IS TO MAKE THE PROCESS MORE COMPLICATED??????!!!!!!!! THIS AIN'T THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! Or is it?

GOOD GOD PEOPLE!

Reed

lstevenson
Dec. 27, 2007, 10:59 PM
For instance, the "harder Training" track would include fences currently "not appropriate" for Training (e.g., 45 deg corners, zig zag over ditch, bull finch, bounce) but at NOVICE height.



I think this is a great idea, since when horse and rider move up a level it's not usually the height and width that are the problem. It is the complexity and technicality combined with the increase in speed.

If we HAVE to continue this trend toward high levels of technicality on x-c (which I say because I really don't see the 'powers that be' changing the x-c back to more straightforward and galloping), then this will better help prepare horse and rider for it.

Take the bounce or the corner for example. If a horse/rider combination has gotten the CONCEPT of either of those by doing a smaller version more slowly, they should be much more successful at their first attempt at the next level. If only just because they are not seeing it for the first time.

Riders would also have to be more technically profficient (in terms of knowledge and technique) to handle these questions. And I'm all for anything that makes a better rider!

Kcisawesome
Dec. 27, 2007, 11:26 PM
This whole idea seems quite complicated and more of a cover up then a solution...

Can't we simplify instead of complicate?

Gnep
Dec. 27, 2007, 11:37 PM
You can not see this on a statistical base. What one has to take in acount, those are average speeds, which makes them meaningless.
From Prelim on we are dealing with the top speeds a horse can handle over a longer distance, between the jumps, not the average speed.
every jump cost time, every combination cost twice, tripple or quadruple the time a single jump cost, each skiny cost twice the time, because of the narrow window to be hit, as single jump.

It is not the increase in speed, it is reaching the speed limits. 520 in prelim means 600 between the jumps, were in training and in novice one can quiet easily cruise along with a 10 to 20 mpm faster than the average speed.
so the speed jump from training to prelim is gigantic, the biggest of all, neither I nor A have such huge jumps in speed, between the jumps.
Combine that with the technical differance from training to prelim. Its huge, the speed. You gallop nicely along in training and you race from jump to jump to combination to combination from prelim on.
Statisticly it is minor, riding wise it is huge and that is what counts

adamsmom
Dec. 28, 2007, 02:47 AM
I bit my tongue at the meeting, but I couldn't keep it up when they put it in print. They said some pretty ignorant things about motor racing licenses too, but I kept my mouth shut.


I guess my question is, WHY did you bite your tongue and keep your mouth shut? The whole point of the "G10 Summit" was to get feedback/input from as many sources as possible.
It may have started an argument, but that may have been a good thing...

It just seems that, if we have information and we are at an open forum where the influential/decision makers of the sport are, we need to share it there, not among those of us who frequent this BB.

LisaB
Dec. 28, 2007, 07:04 AM
Jeez H Christ! Is my solution too simple for them to understand???
Have some venues do options. State in the omnibus 'Lots of options for move up'. Then keep the same track for experienced riders.
If I CHOOSE to take options, it will cost me time. That way I won't be in the running for a ribbon. And those time penalties will cost me a qualifying score to get to a * so I won't be a moron and do all 'easier' courses and then bam, hit a *.
Duh

Janet
Dec. 28, 2007, 07:30 AM
Jeez H Christ! Is my solution too simple for them to understand???
Have some venues do options. State in the omnibus 'Lots of options for move up'. Then keep the same track for experienced riders.
If I CHOOSE to take options, it will cost me time. That way I won't be in the running for a ribbon. And those time penalties will cost me a qualifying score to get to a * so I won't be a moron and do all 'easier' courses and then bam, hit a *.
Duh
Because, under the current rules, a Training course with a 45 deg corner, a bounce, and a zigzag over a ditch, even at Novice height, would not be permitted on a Training course.

Janet
Dec. 28, 2007, 07:33 AM
I guess my question is, WHY did you bite your tongue and keep your mouth shut? The whole point of the "G10 Summit" was to get feedback/input from as many sources as possible.
It may have started an argument, but that may have been a good thing...

It just seems that, if we have information and we are at an open forum where the influential/decision makers of the sport are, we need to share it there, not among those of us who frequent this BB.
Oh, I opened my mouth plenty. Just bit my tongue on a couple of things.

But a tangent on exactly what is (and is not) required to get a license to ride around Daytona at 140 mph+ didn't seem paticularly productive.

gooddirt
Dec. 28, 2007, 07:48 AM
It is not the increase in speed, it is reaching the speed limits. 520 in prelim means 600 between the jumps,

Peak speeds between jumps can reach 700 mpm or more. This is why a single fly fence on a straightaway is so dangerous.

LisaB
Dec. 28, 2007, 08:20 AM
I'm saying options on course at prelim, not training. Sorry, good for first time at this level options, not move up.

retreadeventer
Dec. 28, 2007, 08:33 AM
Quantitative analysis - maybe so. But I second the discussion about hunters from 3' to 3'6". Big difference to the horse.

I just keep recalling the roots of the sport and how the levels were set up; training and below, [b]introductory in nature[\b] and meant to introduce the sport to horse and rider; and preliminary, and above, began the actual [b]testing of the horse and rider preparation[\b].

There is and should be a significant difference between the two levels and not a blending so that there appears to be a softening of prelim to introductory status. We can't create more opportunities for wrecks! JMO.

Adding tiny corners to training is ridiculous and teaches nothing and I think it's a terrible idea. I can jump tiny corners on every horse in the barn for goodness sake. I sure couldn't at prelim xc height/speed in the midst of a competition round! ( Not sure I have ANY horse in the barn can do that. ) But if you set these up and a lot of people successfully negotiate these weeny questions at the INTRODUCTORY level, will they get a false sense of security in their horse's ability to handle a similar prelim question at TESTING level, which might involve max height and spread?

flyingchange
Dec. 28, 2007, 08:35 AM
This is SO stupid.

It sounds to me like this whole easy prelim track thang would be a great way to get sales prospects up to "Prelim" quickly. Sales ads could say - competed through prelim, blah, blah, blah. Quicker avenue to more impressive results and more $$$.

Does go against the whole idea of making eventing at the UL safer ... don't move your horse up a level if they or you are not ready. I foresee more accidents on an "easy" prelim course due to a perception that "it's the 'easier' prelim."

And I actually don't like the idea of making Training harder than it is. It is already plenty technical enough around here. If your horse needs to figure out the technical side of Prelim, go schooling, get help, etc.

yellow rose
Dec. 28, 2007, 08:52 AM
[QUOTE=retreadeventer;2895648]
Adding tiny corners to training is ridiculous and teaches nothing and I think it's a terrible idea. I can jump tiny corners on every horse in the barn for goodness sake.[QUOTE]

I don't think this is true at all -- I ride and bring a lot of young horses up through the levels and I for one would welcome each and every opportunity to better prepare them for a successful career in eventing

Every time you jump a fence your horse is learning. If I can make his first jump over a corner (albeit a tiny ridiculous corner) easy and effortless all the better

I wish Training level would include more questions with smaller fences, such as a down bank to a small corner or a baby bounce. The horses learn a lot from schooling and practice but things also need to be dealt with in a competition situation

I also think a lot of green riders create mental roadblocks for themselves... like they get a phobia of corners because it is strictly an "upper level" fence and when push comes to shove and they have to jump one they are scared to death.. if you introduce them earlier with less intensity maybe the riders will be more confident when they actually reach the upper levels and there will be fewer accidents

jury is still out for me on the two track idea. I do know that I would love some easier preliminaries to get my babies going OR at least the regular preliminary HT's with more options on XC

flutie1
Dec. 28, 2007, 09:01 AM
"... Because, under the current rules, a Training course with a 45 deg corner, a bounce, and a zigzag over a ditch, even at Novice height, would not be permitted on a Training course."

Sure they would. Courses are dictated by Guidelines now, not rules.

Hony
Dec. 28, 2007, 09:06 AM
Two prelim levels are totally unnecessary. That's what schooling is for. My vote is for an increased number of trainings before prelims. I think most people need a minimum of 6 to 10. If it needs to be mandated then so be it. I also believe that training courses should have real corners and other questions that one might find at prelim. Up here we have corners on nearly every training course now. I really like the idea of time penalties that make a dent when you're going to fast and time penalties that don't hurt so much when you're going too slow.

deltawave
Dec. 28, 2007, 09:11 AM
I agree that adding more options on a given course makes a whole lot more sense than two entirely different tracks. In fact it would be a nice challenge for those seeking to move up: can you walk, wheel, plan and RIDE a course that isn't PRECISELY 5 and a half minutes long? The "straight" (easy?) track would be wheeled longer and the tougher options would save time, just like on a three-day track or at the upper levels. Teach riders to think, to decide, to plan the course for THEIR HORSE.

In order to qualify as a "move up", some options would have to be taken...no skating through the "easy" route 100% of the time. (Ha, using the word "easy" in the setting of Preliminary XC still makes me smile...it ain't) Puts a small extra burden on the jump judges, but most shows have many veteran JJs who could be assigned the "option" fences.

Janet
Dec. 28, 2007, 09:26 AM
"... Because, under the current rules, a Training course with a 45 deg corner, a bounce, and a zigzag over a ditch, even at Novice height, would not be permitted on a Training course."

Sure they would. Courses are dictated by Guidelines now, not rules.
Some aspects covered by the Guidelines, but some are covered by the rules. I think most people would interpret the rules as not permitting bounces at Training.

Ja Da Dee
Dec. 28, 2007, 09:42 AM
um, isn't that why we school? I mean, I've been schooling places that have UL type questions that are lower heights to get the horse and rider comfortable with them. Once a rider and horse are doing these easily, they move up to the full sized questions, then put them together in small courses, then the whole shebang. I wonder how adding new levels and changing heights would affect facilities that have to build new courses and add new divisions. I'm in an area that doesn't have a lot of options for HT's, and I know it's not cheap to put together a cross country course, will these new levels even be offered? How does the USEA expect the facilities to fund these new courses?

Someone mentioned that riders may not want to ride a Training at 490mpm because it could affect their placing, I remember there was lots of discussion about this a few years ago when they made some changes to the opt times. I think that if you were seriously looking at moving to Prelim, then you would want to ride the course as close to prelim speed as you can, and not worry about the placing. At that point, preparing for the new level should be the priority... I would think.

I would enthusiastically endorse a good rating system so we know if what we think is a tough course is really a tough course. I would also endorse requiring more clean rides prior to moving up as well as time limits for the horse or rider <ie, having competed at least one of the required training levels in the last two years prior to moving to prelim>

Gnep
Dec. 28, 2007, 09:59 AM
What I don't get, why is there a movement to endorce bad schooling and training, or whey is there a movement to allow unprepared people to get to the next level.

It looks to me, having a two track system, that the sports bends over backwards to allowe everybody to go prelim.

Prelim should weed out the unprepared or unskilled that should stay at Training.

If one does the proper training and schooling than prelim is no problem at all

This consistent watering down of the sport, is what is going to kill the sport.

Camstock
Dec. 28, 2007, 10:38 AM
What I don't get, why is there a movement to endorce bad schooling and training, or whey is there a movement to allow unprepared people to get to the next level.

It looks to me, having a two track system, that the sports bends over backwards to allowe everybody to go prelim.

Prelim should weed out the unprepared or unskilled that should stay at Training.

If one does the proper training and schooling than prelim is no problem at all

This consistent watering down of the sport, is what is going to kill the sport.

Totally agree. The move up to Prelim should require packing a change of underwear. It should be well-respected. Preparation is the key. I know that Flutie and all of us have seen some ugly move up prelim rides, but not everyone is so silly as to move up before they are prepared. I say KISS.

Janet
Dec. 28, 2007, 10:39 AM
mean, I've been schooling places that have UL type questions that are lower heights to get the horse and rider comfortable with them. I dunno. There are lots of schooling courses around here, but I do not know ANY that have Novice height 45 degree corners, or Novice height bounces. Sure, I can set up a show jumping corner, or a show jumping bounce, but that is not the same.

NMK
Dec. 28, 2007, 10:57 AM
Why at Novice height for questions at Training Courses? Why not keep them at training height and option flag them? Now we have to go from Novice height on these type of questions to Prelim height? Maybe I'm missing something.

Jazzy Lady
Dec. 28, 2007, 11:39 AM
Totally agree. The move up to Prelim should require packing a change of underwear. It should be well-respected. Preparation is the key. I know that Flutie and all of us have seen some ugly move up prelim rides, but not everyone is so silly as to move up before they are prepared. I say KISS.

See that's the thing. If your move up requires you to pack another pair of underwear... perhaps you aren't ready.

Yes, you should respect the course, but not be sick over it. Maybe that is only my opinion but if I was that nervous, I probably wouldn't be doing it. I remember being that nervous for entry level (I was 13 and had a psychopath horse) and the results were NEVER positive.

I'm totally with gnep here. Why water down the sport? If people aren't ready, they shouldn't be doing it. Lets not make an outlet for people to do it when they aren't prepared.

I'm still with the lowering the speeds of the upper levels. Drop prelim to 500, I to 520 and A to 540. That would make the jump not so large to prelim and maybe less people would be worrying about the speed. Or make prelim like training where there is speeds to choose from. Prelim speed can be 500-520 depending on what the course designer wanted.

bornfreenowexpensive
Dec. 28, 2007, 12:10 PM
Well...I moved up to Prelim for the first time 10 years ago...and again this year. Things have dramatically changed.

I would love to see a two track. It used to be at prelim that you were given more options at some of the more technical fences....I'm not seeing that any more. Instead, I'm seeing questions that you used to not see until Intermediate...with no options. Those questions are great when you are on a confirmed prelim horse or one that has more boldness then brains...but not so much fun when you are bringing up a careful greenie.

It used to be that you could be prepared for Prelim by just successfully running at training level and schooling your stadium at home. NO ONE schooled x-c more then once or twice at the begining of a season after a greenie understood about water and ditches.

If a new division was offered...at the same events....that ran over basically the same course but with perhaps some options at the tougher technical fences...or even removed some of the technical fences...that would be fantastic. Those divisions would not count as a qualification for a CCI* or as a move up to the next level....but would instead soften the move up slightly. So riders would ENTER a different division and the organizers would not need to keep track as to whether or not they jumped an option....but the rider would know that this course would not count for a qualifier.


But if things are not changed....then we just have to stick to more schooling and other alternatives. But that is a change from the past....and it can be darn hard to find places open to school with the Prelim questions that are now asked today.

hey101
Dec. 28, 2007, 12:11 PM
Yes, you should respect the course, but not be sick over it.
...
Why water down the sport? If people aren't ready, they shouldn't be doing it. Lets not make an outlet for people to do it when they aren't prepared.


I agree with Jazzy Lady. I've started four prelims... completed only one. The first one, my move-up, was at my home course and I jumped around clean, but slow. I had schooled most (but not all) of the tricky combinations. I felt ready and excited for that day, and was thrilled to complete it.

The next one was at a new venue and we started out great, cruised through the first half of the course, then got caught out at a corner. Damn, homework to do. This was late fall so we went home and schooled show-jumping corners all winter. Next spring, went back to that venue and not only was the corner still there, it had been relocated to a tough bending line off a larg-ish ditch... I was nervous, but my mare powered through it! Woo-hoo! And then three fences later I got caught out at the jumping from light-to-dark, over a vertical dropping into water. Dammit.

The next one, only a few weeks later with no real adressing of the problem we'd just encountered, I was SOOOO nervous in the start box that I could have/should have predicted we were going to have problems and should have pulled up before I even started. I remember clearly that on course I was so stiff in the saddle from nervousness that my horse was jumping inverted, and I got caught out at basically the same question- a bounce-drop into water about a 1/3 of the way into the course. I was probably broad-casting loud and clear "hey, there is something to be nervous about here"... so my horse said "well OK, then no thank you on that bounce into water deal". Clearly we were having issues, but I never got the chance to address them on that horse for various reasons- I broke my collarbone about a month later, winter came, then we moved, etc.

Long story short (too late), I was having trouble at Prelim. What I needed to do was to school more, not compete more. It's not that I wasn't prepared, I think it's just that I wasn't prepared ENOUGH considering that neither myself OR the horse had done prelim before. I had done a lot of Trainings on that horse, so I don't know if moving down would have been the answer- although maybe it would have been a good thing for a confidence builder for both of us. But I'm a goal-oriented person, and I had this thought in my mind that "I should be doing Prelim on this horse by now". Clearly not the right thought process.

I don't think Prelim was un-doable. I still don't. But now with my new horse I want to be uber-prepared, ultra-careful, completely confident. I've decided I want to be schooling hte NEXT level before I"m competing at the previous level. Pros don't do this, they seem to rush up the levels with their young horses. But I'm an ammie, I do this FOR FUN, and in my advancing wisdom, I've realized there is absolutely NO reason to rush up the levels.

Again, long story short (too late! :lol:)... I don't think the courses need to change. I just need to be EXTRA PREPARED the next time I go out on a prelim course, whether that's this year or next year or 5 years from now. And I WILL be back. :)

hey101
Dec. 28, 2007, 12:17 PM
I don't think two tracks is the answer... I think there should be a lot more options at tough fences as well to soften the move-up. I think would be too tough for organizers to keep track of who jumped the options and therefore it doesn't qualify as a CCI* prep, but.. that's when it comes down to personal responsibility. If I jump EVERY option and somehow still within the time, it should be MY responsibility to recognize that even though on paper it counted, I'm still NOT READY for a CCI*.

RunForIt
Dec. 28, 2007, 12:39 PM
What I don't get, why is there a movement to endorce bad schooling and training, or whey is there a movement to allow unprepared people to get to the next level.


this is JMHO, but I ride in the lower levels with folks who have $$$$, and could never in their lives stay on my old guy Buddy in one of his WB hissy fits, - THESE folks NEED that "other" track for Prelim and they have the money to buy horses to get them to and around that level. I think THAT'S the reason the two-track, dumbed down Prelim idea is being pushed - MONEY! At some point, you're going to see it at Training too. Training is getting more technical, and you're going to have to ride well, and ride faster in between questions to be in the ribbons...$$$$ makes the game happen. Sorry to be so sarcastic, but sitting and considering all the data from different angles just lead me to this theory. :cool:

bornfreenowexpensive
Dec. 28, 2007, 12:59 PM
this is JMHO, but I ride in the lower levels with folks who have $$$$, and could never in their lives stay on my old guy Buddy in one of his WB hissy fits, - THESE folks NEED that "other" track for Prelim and they have the money to buy horses to get them to and around that level. I think THAT'S the reason the two-track, dumbed down Prelim idea is being pushed - MONEY! At some point, you're going to see it at Training too. Training is getting more technical, and you're going to have to ride well, and ride faster in between questions to be in the ribbons...$$$$ makes the game happen. Sorry to be so sarcastic, but sitting and considering all the data from different angles just lead me to this theory. :cool:


I guess I disagree....I don't think it is about unprepared people getting to the next level....it that the levels have changed and what do we need to get horses ready for the new levels.

Example....my first horse I brought up to prelim 10 years ago. He was an OTTB. I started him. He did one novice, three training and then Prelim in his first season. I had only one x-c jump penalty on him...in his third season of Prelim when I stupidly changed my line to a corner from what I had walked when I saw other riders taking a different line. My error...I paid for it but we were both solid Prelim competitors getting ready for Intermediate. He schoolled x-c ONCE before his move up to prelim. Only new new questions faced at Prelim were bounces (hardly see those any more) and a full coffin. On the toughest prelim courses, you would still only see about 3 truly technical questions. Rest were just big.

Second horse this year. Ran two seasons at training. Was jumping solid around the toughest training courses in Area II without batting an eye. Schoolled more prelim x-c and x-c in general then I have EVER schoolled in my life! Around the the more straight forward prelim course I moved her up at ....no issue at all and got a ribbon. The rest of her prelim runs...not so nice. She did fine on big, fine on narrows and accuracy but had issues with some of the questions that were absolutely new. We started jumping 4'+ at home and ramping up the difficulty. The question coming on courses were ones that 10 years ago you didn't see until Intermediate. A PRO of olymipic level might have gotten her around. So my choices became more and more schooling....or pay a pro to get her around. And generally, I've been told I'm a pretty good rider.

The idea of having a pro get her around sits wrong with me. Is that the direction our sport is going? Let's make Prelim so hard technically that it is no longer the level of education that it once was? 10 years ago, Prelim was the level you put on your x-c miles. It was the level you first saw some questions but it was all about galloping and jumping with a couple of technical issues. Now...3/4 of the courses are technical.

I don't believe in dumbing down the sport....but I also don't like the direction that the course design has taken either. Give me back the BIG honking gallop jumps...instead of making me show jump over x-c jumps. But with the change in course designs.....it has gotten harder to prepare a horse and rider for the jump from training to prelim. So instead of being able to be prepared to move up by runing successfully at training.....you have to school your a$$ off as well....and at least IME....it can be darn hard to find those courses to school unless you know someone who owns a course!

blackwly
Dec. 28, 2007, 01:19 PM
I agree with BornFree on several issues. The questions asked at each level really have changed in the past decade. I brought my first UL horse up from novice to advanced in 1993-97, the second from novice to intermediate from 2001-2005, and a third from novice to prelim in 2007. Over those time periods, I have seen very little substantial change at the training level and below. However, the questions we used to face at intermediate (corner combinations, bounces into water, large water-to-water fences, super-skinnies, often in combination or on turns) have migrated into prelim. I do not necessarily think this is a bad thing, just a basic truth. When I moved my greenie up to prelim this year, I did it with more training competitions under his belt and more confirmed dressage work than my previous horses, because times have changed. Things went fine and he jumped around very well, but I think that was the result of very careful preparation and an experienced ride. In other words, I think I would have had a MUCH harder time these days moving up to prelim myself with a green horse.

The solution to me doesn't necessarily require making big changes to existing prelim courses, but I do think we need to bring back more real options (good, long, time-consuming ones) and I think the idea of adding more small technical features to training level courses is critical. Not everyone has the time and opportunity to school prelim xcountry courses countless times. Not everyone gets to try out the upper levels for the first time on a horse who has been ridden by a pro. We need to keep the sport competitive and serious but allow those solid training riders and horses the chance to moveup safely and in a way that builds confidence.

retreadeventer
Dec. 28, 2007, 01:54 PM
[QUOTE=retreadeventer;2895648]
Adding tiny corners to training is ridiculous and teaches nothing and I think it's a terrible idea. I can jump tiny corners on every horse in the barn for goodness sake.[QUOTE]

I don't think this is true at all -- I ride and bring a lot of young horses up through the levels and I for one would welcome each and every opportunity to better prepare them for a successful career in eventing

Every time you jump a fence your horse is learning. If I can make his first jump over a corner (albeit a tiny ridiculous corner) easy and effortless all the better

I wish Training level would include more questions with smaller fences, such as a down bank to a small corner or a baby bounce. The horses learn a lot from schooling and practice but things also need to be dealt with in a competition situation

I also think a lot of green riders create mental roadblocks for themselves... like they get a phobia of corners because it is strictly an "upper level" fence and when push comes to shove and they have to jump one they are scared to death.. if you introduce them earlier with less intensity maybe the riders will be more confident when they actually reach the upper levels and there will be fewer accidents

jury is still out for me on the two track idea. I do know that I would love some easier preliminaries to get my babies going OR at least the regular preliminary HT's with more options on XC

Yellow Rose, you are supposed to jump these bigger more complicated questions in the ring on flat ground where the rails fall down -- and do it confidently - before you go out and try it over fixed timber of any size, and of course, you do that and know that I am sure. I think baby corners over fixed fences on xc even at smaller sizes are a terrible idea because any horse can squeak over something small and inconsequential and the rider will think they have it licked without the quality work at home over bigger things. Gnep said it. It's got to be training first before competing. We are trying to make it easier and water it down so the training can occur at the competition and at prelim level that is wrong because, again, prelim and up begins the TEST of the skills and not the introduction and familiarity levels, bn, n and t.

I see a bad trend in forcing the level up without insuring the horse and rider pairs get the experience necessary. I too make a load of young horses and have been for 30 years. Horse just are not motorcycles. You don't just turn the key and off you go. They have to learn to get their landing gear up, and the bigger the fence and more complicated the question, the more of an athlete you need to have under the saddle. The men are separated from the boys pretty much at the TESTING level. An "introductory" prelim level is just another training level and should be labeled and referred to as such. If it is not a test of skill then it is introductory. Tests should begin at prelim level, at least, that's the way it's been for about 50 years.

All the levels have been ramping up so this is sort of a top down thing going on world wide. We are just kind of worrying about how to keep our riders safe while the level thing gets worked out. Shoot I have a good training horse I'd like to move up to prelim and this intro prelim deal sounds great but I know it's wrong in my heart and my mind and a way to get us both hurt.

hey101
Dec. 28, 2007, 02:34 PM
Bornfree, I have to say that reading your post made me feel better about my less-than-successful attempts at prelim! If someone who has already done it before in years past was having trouble now, it makes it even tougher for a prelim-newbie nowadays (I hope you understand that I'm GLAD you had trouble, just makes me feel better that maybe it's not just me :))

And I agree with you- a Pro could have definitely gotten my horse around- she had PLENTY of jump and PLENTY of go-attack-the-fence- but that's not the point, is it?

RunForIt
Dec. 28, 2007, 02:53 PM
origianlly posted by bornfreenowexpensive:

I guess I disagree....I don't think it is about unprepared people getting to the next level....it that the levels have changed and what do we need to get horses ready for the new levels.


point well taken - I always think well of your reasoning and I do hope that you are more understanding the situation than me. If its about getting the horses ready for each level, then more qualifiying at Training on specific courses would seem to be part of the answer. All Training courses are not equal, nor are "completions". Good Dirt's comment about the maximum speeds between XC fences at Prelim was an eye opener!

I'm sitting here with a green horse about to start BN and a mare with a pro on her about to start Training. This will all get sorted out one way or another before I reach the starting gate. :cool:

bornfreenowexpensive
Dec. 28, 2007, 03:27 PM
Not an issue RunForIt.....I'm sure that there are some folks like you are describing but to be honest. Prelim usually scares the snot out of most adults so most are not trying to buy their way to compete at it....YRs is a different story. Many of them still think they are immortal;)

I do think that the push is really coming more from us mortals. Good riders who are struggling to bring up green horses...and some of the pros facing the same issues.

I think money might come into play from people trying to move up a horse too fast in order to sell it as a "Prelim" horse. That is where the cynical side of me completely agrees with you.

Prelim is much tougher from a techincal perspective then it use to be....but then Advanced and the other ULs have substantially changed too. It is a different game. Part of me is sure that I'm now riding 20 years too late. Part of me embraces that event riders have gotten stronger in dressage and stadium (for the most part) and that our sport is now requiring that an event horse be truly competitive at all three phases. But I do think that something needs to be done to make the jump less dramatic.....because as it stands...it is a bigger jump then it used to be.

Hey101--glad that I made you feel better:D

deltawave
Dec. 28, 2007, 03:34 PM
Not all riders with "money" are pushing to get to the upper levels, at least not that I've seen. There are just as many of them doing Novice Rider on their super fancy horses, with no intention ever of moving up. Which is perfectly FINE (although IMO they should go "Open" after their fifth year for pity's sake)...my point being that having money does not always connotate bad riding or bad decisions. :)

RunForIt
Dec. 28, 2007, 04:07 PM
Not an issue RunForIt.....I'm sure that there are some folks like you are describing but to be honest. Prelim usually scares the snot out of most adults so most are not trying to buy their way to compete at it....YRs is a different story. Many of them still think they are immortal;)


Thanks! I'm definitely one of those adults that prelim keeps honest out there on XC! Training is just fine with me...:yes: :cool:

Firefox
Dec. 28, 2007, 04:36 PM
But that just isn't the case.

The jump from Training to Prelim is 4 inches- the same as the jump from Beginner Novice to Novice, and the same as the jump from Novice to Training. So it is not "the most substantial increase"

It IS true that Prelim is the first level at which your cross country speed is significanly higher than your show jumping speed, so you DO need to learn to "jump at speed". But it isn't the "biggest increase". And most people who move up to Prelim are not trying to "make time" on their first ouiting.

The bit about being more technical IS very true.

But to say "The jump from training to preliminary demands not only the most substantial increase in height and speed..." is just plain NOT TRUE.

True, the height difference is only 4 inches but, it seems to be that hurdle of most any horse has the scope to jump 3 foot and not 3"6" and then you add the spreads and I dont know what the differences are there, but again it comes to the scope of the horse and at those heights dont allow as much room for error as the lower heights do. Just my two cents worth as to why it seems to be a big leap!!!

Janet
Dec. 28, 2007, 04:45 PM
True, the height difference is only 4 inches but, it seems to be that hurdle of most any horse has the scope to jump 3 foot and not 3"6" and then you add the spreads and I dont know what the differences are there, but again it comes to the scope of the horse and at those heights dont allow as much room for error as the lower heights do. Just my two cents worth as to why it seems to be a big leap!!! Oh, I quite agree that it is a BIG transition (it has only taken me 35 years from my first Training until I feel ready for Prelim). But the statement that "it is the most substantial increase in height" just isn't true.

retreadeventer
Dec. 28, 2007, 07:26 PM
Janet, what about the percentage of max height allowed at prelim in xc - and stadium if it applies -- would the percentage make a difference? I can find where the requirements and recommendations are for the levels, wasn't it a separate pdf thing or is it in the rule book?

deltawave
Dec. 28, 2007, 07:32 PM
I don't think the statement was meant to be taken QUITE so literally.

Janet
Dec. 28, 2007, 09:57 PM
Janet, what about the percentage of max height allowed at prelim in xc - and stadium if it applies -- would the percentage make a difference? I can find where the requirements and recommendations are for the levels, wasn't it a separate pdf thing or is it in the rule book?
The specs are in Appendiices 1 and 2 in the rulebook. The guidelines are a separate document. You can download it from the USEA web site.

WRT the percentage at max ht, the only rule like that applies to Show Jumping. At Training and above, "At least one third shall be of maximum height for the level offered". No equivalent rule for Cross Country.

IfWishesWereHorses
Dec. 29, 2007, 04:49 AM
Can someone please answer this for me.

What height is your training, and what height is your prelim?

In NZ, we struck this exact problem! The gap from training (95cm - 3ft 2") to prelim (1.10m - 3ft 9) was too big - thats a 15cm/6" difference in height alone, let alone the distance/speed/width factor.

So.....the NZEF introduced another level, which we call Pre Novice (our prelim down here is what we call Novice, same as in the UK). This level is like an easy prelim - definitely a good move up from training. It doesn't count for any quals towards a 1*, but is a great moveup type course.

We don't have any restrictions here on how many training or pre novice you have to do before running novice. Anyone can just do novice (prelim) when they feel they are ready.

Our levels run:

Training (95cm)
Pre Novice (1.05m)
Novice (1.10m)

A US rider whom I know, actually commented to me on a recent trip down here that our novice was considerably bigger than US prelim, and that US prelim was more like our pre novice. So....what IS your prelim heights??? Thanks!

Badger
Dec. 29, 2007, 08:50 AM
Beginner Novice 2'7"
Novice 2'11"
Training 3'3"
Prelim 3'7"
Intermediate 3'9"
Advanced 3'11"

Hony
Dec. 29, 2007, 09:30 AM
I am an adult amateur who endurance rode for years and started eventing 5 years ago. Although I jumped a bit as a kid, I didn't really start jumping until I started eventing. Last season I did my first two prelims on a mare that is 14.3hh that I got as a yearling. I would think that being an adult amateur under these circumstances would put me in a higher risk catagory for moving up.
Oddly, the prelim move up was easier for me than the training move up.
I attribute this to having done about 13 :eek: training level events, including the training 3 day at Waredaca. If someone wants a move up course there is nothing better than doing the training 3 day.
I don't think this is something that the governing bodies can regulate. People are going to make mistakes and risk their lives and there isn't a lot we can do about it. There will always be people who just barely meet the qualifications and think it's a good idea to enter that next level. Dumbing down the achievement is not going to help anything. Instead, I think that prelim needs to be promoted as it is to prevent people from taking it lightly.

deltawave
Dec. 29, 2007, 10:05 AM
Again, I think the POINT of the discussion was that the gap between T and P IS indeed wide...no, not in the precise measurements and dimensions and velocities, but the fact that you are no longer cantering but GALLOPING, and everyone will probably agree that 3'3" is a different jumping effort, overall, from 3'7". The horse has to USE ITSELF for the first time.

RunForIt
Dec. 29, 2007, 10:30 AM
Again, I think the POINT of the discussion was that the gap between T and P IS indeed wide...no, not in the precise measurements and dimensions and velocities, but the fact that you are no longer cantering but GALLOPING, and everyone will probably agree that 3'3" is a different jumping effort, overall, from 3'7". The horse has to USE ITSELF for the first time.

all of that, PLUS, going at that speed (and more between fences) means that the rider has to be able to adjust the horse, make lightening quick decisions, jump, gallop away to more decisions. I'm just fine at Training cause I have time to sort things out, we've jumped scarier stuff at home or these very fences schooling...Prelim isn't the same sort of ride.

The gap that exists between Training and Prelim has to be filled with good riding - lots and lots of it before the first Prelim entry is even mailed. I know my limits - its scary to watch those who don't.

flutie1
Dec. 29, 2007, 10:46 AM
"... The gap that exists between Training and Prelim has to be filled with good riding - lots and lots of it before the first Prelim entry is even mailed. I know my limits - its scary to watch those who don't."

Amen!!!

snoopy
Dec. 29, 2007, 11:18 AM
I have not read a lot of the responses but, for me anyway, the move up to Prelim is when the sport becomes a bit different. You need to know more about fitness, technical, questions, prep, speed, training, etc. The bar gets raised in so many aspects. It goes beyond just the increase in height/spread.
You really need to put your thinking cap on from this level forward.

Whisper
Dec. 29, 2007, 11:38 AM
Oh, I quite agree that it is a BIG transition (it has only taken me 35 years from my first Training until I feel ready for Prelim). But the statement that "it is the most substantial increase in height" just isn't true.
I think they meant subjectively rather than objectively. Saying something like, "Most horses and riders find the increase in height and speed more difficult when moving up from Training to Preliminary than for any other move up between levels." would have been more accurate.

zerofaults
Dec. 29, 2007, 12:16 PM
Personally I found the jump from novice to training mor difficult than training to preliminary. In novice generally there aren't any combinations, at least closely related ones. Novice fences can be jumped from a halt, all drops are small enough for the horse to step over, ditches are tiny, and water jumps are hardly ever in to the water, so if your horse is balky it isn't much of a dilemma. Training is the first time there are combinations a rider must think about, count out stirdes to, and plan. This is rare at novice. At training there are bigger drops, jump drops, and more difficult water fences, along with wider ditches. Some horses are talented enough, yes, to jump a training fence from a halt but most are not. Most horses can troop their way around novice, but not so many can go training. Training level is the first level where scope really comes in handy.

Maybe it is just me, as in my younger years I competed in the jumpers, but prelim fences did not seem big to me. I have dabbled in dressage as well when my first event horse couldn't jump anymore, so the step up into real flatwork was not too hard for preliminary for me. I did my homework, and the jump from T to P was not too difficult.

Edited because I sound a bit pretentious in this post! I did not mean to say preliminary is easy by any means, just explaining why personally it wasn't the toughest move up.

deltawave
Dec. 29, 2007, 12:42 PM
I find the prospect of moving from Novice to Training on my young horse COMPLETELY DAUNTING at this point, MUCH more scary than Training to Prelim on my veteran horse! That is direct function of my weenie-ness, though. :)

Gnep
Dec. 29, 2007, 04:59 PM
Runfor it, thats the point.

One more point, you see to may rider go into the startbox at prelim that are just plain scared.

It is ok to walk the course and have doubts and worries or to be scared, but once you enter the startbox you have to have all those worries, doubts and scarynes resolved and you have to have the utmost confidence in yourself, in your horse and about the task that lies ahead and you can not allowe anything that happens during the ride shatter that confidance.
From prelim on it takes a certain mental make up, a suprem believe in onse and the horses ability and some serious riding skills and athletic ability.

What to many of the riders that try the jump from training to prelim either don't know or not understand, this is the point were you have to take the leadership as a rider. Till training you could split it with your horse. From Prelim on it is the rider and if the rider hesitates, is scared not convincing and does not throw his/her heart over the jump the horse will quit.

I think this is the real differance

petit fromage
Dec. 29, 2007, 06:35 PM
In the COTH magazine I read the discussions about improving the safety of the Training-to-Prelim move. However, in the last several months, it seems the most serious accidents have happened to some of the most skilled and experienced riders, not "move-up" riders. What is being done to prevent those terrible accidents? It seems the USEA is talking lots about lower level safety (and that is VERY important) but not enough about top level safety.

Snapdragon
Dec. 29, 2007, 07:59 PM
pf, you read my mind. I do think that there is an issue to be addressed about the jump from T to P, but I'm also wondering why this has become such a hot-button topic when the very bad accidents have been at the P (the only reason I include this level is because of an accomplished rider who lost her life riding P last year in FL: I don't think this was a circumstance of someone just moving up) and up level.

Maybe there were lots of discussions at the annual meeting about this, but I haven't heard or read anything about it.

Hony
Dec. 30, 2007, 09:41 AM
On the issue of safety I think we need to separate the idea that having experience is the same having a good ride or being a good, careful, thoughtful rider. I can think of many people who have a ton of experience and are bad riders or are riders who just can't seem to put it all together. Other issues may cause a rider to ride poorly on a particular day like fatigue or emotion. On the other hand there are riders with limited experience who are fabulous riders with a natural eye and great timing.

There are also good riders on tough horses which cause scary rides. An example of that would be Amy Tryon's WEG ride on Poggio. Although it was an amazing ride (clear and within the time) there were some scary moments when that horse was trying get away from her.

The thing is that there are many factors that cannot be controlled by a governing body. Someone may be well within the qualifications for a certain level but still have an accident. In particular I can see this happening at the T to P jump because most horses can make it around T courses easily but at the P level, as Gnep said, the rider needs to become a lot more involved. It's one thing to get carted around a T course by a horse with no brakes and a whole other thing at the Prelim level and higher. It's one thing to pick to every jump on a T course and much worse to do the same at prelim level where the jump requires an effort and jumping out of nothing just doesn't work.
I believe it remains up to the rider to ensure that they are properly prepared for the level rather than adding a level or changing the courses.

colliemom
Dec. 30, 2007, 04:48 PM
.....I got caught out at basically the same question- a bounce-drop into water about a 1/3 of the way into the course. ...

Here is a perfect example of what bornfree is saying. A bounce-drop into water on PRELIM? :eek: :eek: That's more typically an Advanced question (was on the advanced course at Plantation 3 years ago.) That's at least three technical questions combined into one -- bounce / drop / water. Yikes!

I think most of what is being asked for (and I agree with most of what bornfree has been saying) can be accomplished within the current rules and guidelines, using one track with options, introducing more technical questions earlier (at training) with options, offer more T/P divisions where the Training XC includes real prelim questions at the lower heights. And provide some better and standard communication regarding what each course offers so that competitors can better select what course is best for them in their training evolution. If we can provide better information to competitors, they can make more informed decisions and take responsibility for their own competitive selections.

ksbadger
Jan. 1, 2008, 11:28 PM
I think most of what is being asked for (and I agree with most of what bornfree has been saying) can be accomplished within the current rules and guidelines, using one track with options, introducing more technical questions earlier (at training) with options, offer more T/P divisions where the Training XC includes real prelim questions at the lower heights.

I can only agree with the intent but the trouble is that all these type of fences (drops, banks & ditches) are very expensive to install properly on a course such that they do not cause their own problems. I have seen courses where the original design of the bank complex allowed similar questions at all levels - one was a hexagonal mound with differing heights off each side and the other was an offset step pyramid that could be ridden up & over in several directions - but the majority only serve one level. The cost of adding options for any two-level competition would also seem prohibitive for the majority of events with the added problem of how would you ensure that the options are, in fact, equivalent?

TexasTB
Jan. 1, 2008, 11:42 PM
How about, instead of complicating things with the addition of another level or more technicality on cross country, we could return XC to what it is supposed to be, and eliminate the stupid technical questions that don't belong on a prelilm course?

Gnep
Jan. 2, 2008, 01:07 AM
Adding those options would about bankruped every other organizer, adding a inbetween course would do about the same. Or entry fees around the CCI level would make it pay.

I would sugest, riding lessons, quality preparionts, and maybe the realistic assesment that training is very nice and you and or your horse are not prelim material no matter how much you school.

I have jet to ride a prelim, walk a prelim that I would consider to much, stupid or to technical. I have walked a few that had stupid jumps, but nothing more.
I and A a completly differant story.

Even small areas as 9 and 10 have everything from move up, training on stereoids to prelims as close to I as you want to go at prelim.

It is quiet simple, make the right choises to move up to prelim, if you don't, it will be a rude awakening. If you make the right choise and still can't get it done, than prelim is not for you.

The information is there, all you have to do, walk the courses at the shows you go to, not just the one you ride but the ones that are the next step. Part of the home work.

What needs to be understood, the Upper Levels are a completly differant game and this game starts at prelim.
Period

If you want to event at those levels do your homework or stay away from it.

retreadeventer
Jan. 2, 2008, 05:48 AM
What needs to be understood, the Upper Levels are a completly differant game and this game starts at prelim.
Period

If you want to event at those levels do your homework or stay away from it.

This is what I am saying too! Yes, yes, yes. Beef up training if you have to, but don't make prelim easier in some kind of attempt to allow more people to wreck.

Jazzy Lady
Jan. 2, 2008, 09:14 AM
Thank you Gnep! Once again I agree completely.

Too many people just want to say they are going "prelim". It's a status figure to a lot of people. You need to work for it.

fooler
Jan. 2, 2008, 04:53 PM
I think they meant subjectively rather than objectively. Saying something like, "Most horses and riders find the increase in height and speed more difficult when moving up from Training to Preliminary than for any other move up between levels." would have been more accurate.

You are correct as well as the person who noted a 3'7" fence requires more effort from the horse than a 3'3" fence. My mare tended to fart around on Novice & Training courses because she could skip over the lower fences. On our 1st ever Prelim (which was the 1st Prelim for both of us) her little head came up & she focused on the fences. Finally she had to concentrate on what she was doing and put some effort into her job. Edited to say - she had plently of scope - but the larger fences required more attention from her. And yes I had more to think about & to be responsible for more.

It is a huge 'mental' jump from training to prelim. More time should be spent at Novice & Training to confirm all of the questions offered there. Then spend the time necessary at Prelim to confirm those questions before moving up; if you wish. Very few horse & rider combos can compete 3-4 HT at each level before moving up. Even the BNT riders have to either hold at a level, until the horse understands, or move back down to find a level where they can begin building again.

As the old saying goes - Make haste slowly.

bornfreenowexpensive
Jan. 2, 2008, 05:55 PM
What needs to be understood, the Upper Levels are a completly differant game and this game starts at prelim.
Period

If you want to event at those levels do your homework or stay away from it.


I guess that is the key change that I have seen. Prelim use to be the basic level of eventing....it is the level that most people eventing reached and competed at...it was the level that you could pull a horse out of the Hunt field and be able to ride around (well at least the hunt field in my area of the country). That is not true today and today I think it is a harder level to move up to then it was 10 years ago.....and that is not because of the size or speed....but the technical questions now asked.

And that is what I think is wrong. I have never and still do not think of Prelim as the UL. It is the level that is supposed to PREP you for the ULs. The first level that you get some of the serious x-c questions and have to actually be able to ride. But what I'm seeing now is that while the technical questions at Intermediate and Advance have gone off the deep end...it has dribbled down to Prelim....and while that is probably needed to make the jump from prelim to intermediate....nothing much has changed for making the jump to Prelim. Perhaps nothing will be done...and I know that I personally will be fine. Prelim is still not that hard.....it just takes a different prep for x-c to do well and unfortunately, a prep that is harder for many people to be able to do (as opposed to being able to successfully run over the tougher training level courses).

GotSpots
Jan. 2, 2008, 06:54 PM
Prelim is still not that hard.....it just takes a different prep for x-c to do well and unfortunately, a prep that is harder for many people to be able to do (as opposed to being able to successfully run over the tougher training level courses).
Can you distill what that prep is? I think that's a valuable part of the discussion.

RunForIt
Jan. 2, 2008, 07:20 PM
Can you distill what that prep is? I think that's a valuable part of the discussion.

Thanks for asking that question, GotSpots. The more specific that one question can be unpacked, the better off so many horses and riders will be in so many situations. When you're the person learning, there has to be a roadmap, with lots of landmarks...

bornfreenowexpensive
Jan. 2, 2008, 07:32 PM
Can you distill what that prep is? I think that's a valuable part of the discussion.


Well I think that has a lot to do with what type of horse that you are riding. But since the type of horse I like to ride hasn't changed but my prep has changed. I like sensitive and very careful jumpers....so they tend to need confident rides initially and I prefer big gallopy courses that builds their confidence. I tend to like horses who seem to benefit from running and jumping (height of fences is not typically an issue that I have)...and yet those courses are not easy to find.

My prep before was be comfortable running over the hardest training level courses I could, jump bigger and more technical fences in the ring (as in be comfortable jumping 3'9" courses and more accuracy types of questions and adjustability of strides) and perhaps one or two schools x-c over the new prelim questions (coffin, bounces etc.).

My prep now....stay at training level longer then I ever did before. Jump even bigger in the ring (4'+), more often and even more complicated questions in the ring and a LOT more x-c schooling. Since I have found it very difficult in this area to find more then one or two x-c courses that were good confidence building courses....our x-c schooling is ramped upped. So instead of just schooling one or two of the more technical questions...I've tried to get to schooling opportunties where I can run a mini course--stringing together many fences...basically running the confident building courses I used to be able to find. It used to be that you could use events as schooling....and while I still consider each event part of the schooling, the courses are not as inviting and therefore I have had to get used to the fact that I might need to scratch after walking...and be even more tuned to how the course is affecting my horse (giving confidence v. taking it away).

But the level of training my horses now have to have for me to feel they are ready for Prelim....is about the level that my horse had 10 years ago when I was getting ready for Intermediate.

Gnep
Jan. 2, 2008, 08:24 PM
Since I have evented for something like 14 years in this country, I can not say that I have changed anything concerning getting my horses to prelim and past it. I do not school X-C more than befor. I do it maybe 3 times a year. I do not jump higher or more often.
I have not changed a thing.
I had to adjust my training to the specific horses, or how long they stay at one level, but it has absolutely nothing to do with any changes in the CD of X-C.
And I do not think, or see, that there are realy dramatic changes in Prelim. Rather Opposit, the real gutwrencher are gone, the courses are rather predictable, at times rather boring.
Hardcore courses, that not only requiered very good riding, but sheer guts. like old Trojan, or the so bad CICs at High Praerie, or the realy gutsy CCIs at Galway they are all gone.
Rebecca I guess is the only one left in the West.
Prelim at Trojan had 3 water combination, including at vertical drop bounce into the water, and a 3 drops, 1 stride, ending in a huge hanging log drop, and a double combination in the water and so on, plus all that skinny stuff and the big fly fences.
High Praerie, wholy cow, technical and gutsy ( I know Janet is going to beat me up ), but that was a sheer guts and riding skill and experiance course, and fast, seriously fast.

Talking about trying to move up, those courses would kik your ass to nowhere land if you were not seriously prepared.
That, to the so called easier old courses, were you could take a hunter and wip around them.

bornfreenowexpensive
Jan. 2, 2008, 08:52 PM
Perhap Gnep...it is the difference in location. I have only evented on the east coast....my experience is limited to the Area I and II and a bit of Area III with the bulk of my experience in Area II. I have spoken with others who have been around even longer then me and they have a similar experience.

And in this area....many of our fox hunt horses are ex-steeple chase horses ....jumping 4 railers is not uncommon. It is big hunt country....but not super technical...which is why I said you could take a hunt horse out of the Cheshire hunt field and run Prelim....and why many Unionville horses started out at Prelim in eventing. The old prelims that I think about had BIG a$$ fences....but they were galloping fences...not this corner, narrow, turn bounce crap that we have now.

ksbadger
Jan. 4, 2008, 12:21 AM
Thank you Gnep! Once again I agree completely.

Too many people just want to say they are going "prelim". It's a status figure to a lot of people. You need to work for it.

Looking at the statistics and the comments here, it appears there are two populations of riders. The first work long & hard to bring themselves to do Prelim (or higher) safely & well - often with horses that are not prime eventing material. Both horse & rider may be at the highest point they'll ever reach but they're fit & definitely should be doing the level.

The second group look on Prelim not as the start of the higher levels but as something to be gotten through as quickly as possible not the training (small t) experience it should be. You can often tell their mindset by their handle (OlympicXXXX or 2012XXXX) even though they probably haven't been eventing more than a couple of years. I wonder if a large part of the problem isn't that the NAYRCs/college/21 y.o. maximum doesn't allow the longer work-up - it pushes them to get to the * or ** level ASAP. Add to this the insane amounts of extra-curricular activities loaded onto American kids relative to the Europeans that severely limits the sheer time each week needed to get both horse & rider fit....

Flame suit on.

bornfreenowexpensive
Jan. 4, 2008, 11:08 AM
[quote=ksbadger;2911759]
The second group look on Prelim not as the start of the higher levels but as something to be gotten through as quickly as possible not the training (small t) experience it should be. [quote]


Not sure I agree....I think that there are probably more then just two groups. For me...I always considered Prelim the level that you spent the longest time at. Training level and novice are very introductory and just give the basics but Prelim was always the first time that you were actually had to have a bit of fitness, and the jumps had a little more size but it wasn't so hard and technical as the higher levels. It was the level that they introduced technical questions and introduced a bit more of the speed. Now, it is just less of an introductory level. I'm personally not advocating dumming it down....but I do see the gap between training and Prelim being a bit wider (it has always been wide). It may not be as noticable that it has gotten wider to the riders already at a higher level but it is to many of the rest of us. It is always (and always has been) easier to bring up a green horse if you as the rider are competing at a higher level and Prelim is a step down. ....perhaps some of my frustration is more the direction of x-c in general....maybe I will just switch to steeple chase!

hey101
Jan. 4, 2008, 11:54 AM
....maybe I will just switch to steeple chase!

After reading this thread and the other thread about $20K+/year :eek::eek: to compete at Prelim, I'm thinking foxhunting is looking more and more fun and realistic, with an occaisonal event/ dressage show/ jumper show thrown in. If I make it to Prelim again, great. If not, that's OK too- I want to have FUN with my horses. What's fun about feeling horrendously guilty at spending $600-700+ PER EVENT (after adding in entry, gas, food, lodging), and then stressing about whether I've schooled enough prelim and maybe even Intermediate XC and 4' stadium fences to wonder if I'll make it around on my green horse?

$1500 annual subscription to a foxhunt is looking cheap at the price. ;)

Camstock
Jan. 4, 2008, 12:16 PM
I should have said that the THOUGHT of moving up to Prelim the first time should require a change in underwear. I meant that it should inspire respect ahead of time, followed by preparation, followed by actually doing it. I didn't mean a first time prelim rider should be worried on the morning of xc. I was being a bit light about it and did not fill in the blanks. I can see how it was fairly interpreted the way it was. Sorry to leave such room for misinterpretation. Mea culpa.

Just to clarify, I moved my horse (and myself for the first time) up to Prelim last summer. With this horse I spent two years at Novice helping him become relaxed and confident in his work (I've brought a handful of horses to N and T levels). Then we did a spare number of T level events, and when that went swimmingly because of the good foundation at N (and a bunch of schooling and clinicing etc.), moved up to P, and now have 2 Ps under our belts with no xc jump faults (double clear first run) and a few time faults and finished 6th at the area championships, which we qualified for with our first run. Some really good horsepeople would say I shouldn't have run a championship level P course for our second outing at the level, I'm sure, but it is about knowing your horse and preparation. My little experience is nothing compared to what some people on this board have done. But, and with all due respect to them, I am exactly the type of person you are talking about in this thread--the move up from T to P people. I felt great on the morning of my move up to Prelim. I was ready, my horse was ready, I could visualize every stride of it and I was psyched. I was rider number 1, first out of the start box on a newly redesigned course, and went after a long wait due to getting judges in place, and I was relaxed. I knew we were going to smoke it, thanks to preparation.

I'm with the "personal responsibility" camp. Do your homework. Watch the best, learn from every good rider, get good instruction, condition yourself and your horse, react to criticism by working harder, live it, eat it, sleep it.

If we dumb it down, my inclination is to believe that people won't do the work they need to do.

purplnurpl
Jan. 4, 2008, 12:36 PM
I did lots of homework and still needed spare undies...and a barf bag...and I cried the entire time a tacked up for XC.

There is nothing wrong with being really nervous.

and sometimes it's the competitive edge that brings on the nerves-not being afraid that one might not be ready.
Finishing was not my goal. A clear run would not have been good enough for me.
Finishing in style is what I like.
I don't pay the entry to just gallop around. I can do that at schooling shows for 50 bucks.

It's simple guys.
A growing population breeds more village idiots. The sheer number of eventers has been going up, up, and up.
It's unfortuante but we can't take care of everyone ~and neither can the USEA. They set rules and standards for saftey.

Just because my county puts up cameras at all the stop lights doesn't mean that people who previously ran red lights will suddenly stop.
so what, now we need to employ a traffic guard as well?

Kids learn when they make their own mistakes. Fact of life.

hey101
Jan. 4, 2008, 12:57 PM
For me it's not about being prepared or guts. i know what I need to do to make it happen the next time.

For me it's about being a cheapskate. Stupidly, I figured out my basic horse care expenses for two horses for the past year (board, grain, healthcare, lessons, shoes, truck and trailer insurance- but not competitions, clinics or gas). Let's just say that was a BAD idea. :lol: And my board rates just jumped $100/ month- that's $1200 off the top before I even set foot off the property. Add in estimated gas and competition expenses... another $10-20K a year for 3-6 competitions per horse is TOO MUCH. I've hit my $$ threshold- I just can't justify that.

flutie1
Jan. 4, 2008, 01:04 PM
"... I wonder if a large part of the problem isn't that the NAYRCs/college/21 y.o. maximum doesn't allow the longer work-up - it pushes them to get to the * or ** level ASAP. Add to this the insane amounts of extra-curricular activities loaded onto American kids relative to the Europeans that severely limits the sheer time each week needed to get both horse & rider fit...."

No argument here John. Well said!

Flutie

ksbadger
Jan. 4, 2008, 11:40 PM
Kids learn when they make their own mistakes. Fact of life.

But the whole problem is that recently quite a few young eventers haven't survived to apply what they (might have) learned. Isn't this where this thread started?

Janet
Jan. 5, 2008, 11:21 AM
But the whole problem is that recently quite a few young eventers haven't survived to apply what they (might have) learned. Isn't this where this thread started?
THIS thread started with me being literal minded about heights and speeds.

ksbadger
Jan. 5, 2008, 06:33 PM
THIS thread started with me being literal minded about heights and speeds.

My apologies, Janet, you're right of course. Just that the background to the thread, to me at least, was how to bring on future eventers (young or old) safely up through Training to Prelim & beyond.

LisaB
Jan. 7, 2008, 11:05 AM
Article from UK's horse and hound
Check this out:
http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/news/397/172078.html

Jazzy Lady
Jan. 7, 2008, 11:15 AM
Those pre-novice plus classes sound the same as shows hosting a T/P or a P/I

snoopy
Jan. 7, 2008, 11:25 AM
Those pre-novice plus classes sound the same as shows hosting a T/P or a P/I

Agreed. Though in the theory these sound like good things, I am not really a fan of them. XC is and should be the MAIN challenge of the sport...regardless of the level. It defeats this purpose by running a "harder" dressage/showjumping track and an easier XC. I do not see the purpose it serves the sport in general. It becomes a pick and choose sport then. "Well my horse can do ADV dressage, INT sj, and NOV xc so there needs to be a division that suits". If there is a need to "bridge the gap" than that should be "gapped" with more training and experience at the previous level.