2009-2012 Eventing High Performance Plan

[JER]

Although I posted about this on the 'Developing Riders' thread, the more I think about it, the more I think it deserves its own discussion.

Over at the USEF website, you can review the 2009-20012 Eventing High Performance Plan (http://www.usef.org/documents/highPerformance/eventing/EventingHPP.pdf).

This, my friends, is the future of eventing in the eyes of the various HP eventing committees at the USEF.

Is this a viable plan to win medals? What will be the impact on the sport on the national and local levels? Is it an accurate assessment of (1) the state of eventing in the US or (2) what is needed today for success in international competition?

Your thoughts?

[purplnurpl]

Thanks JER. I have had a question about the High Pre catagory for some time now.

I saw on the USEF membership form there is a section for High Performance. Costs addition dinero I believe.

Who checks that box and at what point are you considered High Performace?

Also, just random...
I can't find the FEI Rider and Horse forms for the life of me. And don't be like Rayers and say, 'it's on the USEF site'. Dang it! I can't find it on that site or I wouldn't have asked to begin with. duh.
anyone have a link to those bad boys?

[JER]

Also, just random...
I can't find the FEI Rider and Horse forms for the life of me.

Is this (http://www.usef.org/Contentpage2.aspx?id=eventing) what you're looking for?

[tx3dayeventer]

Who checks that box and at what point are you considered High Performace?


e. Eventing (riders only, except as noted below)
(1) FEI Recognized Competitions/Classes in the U.S., Canada, and/or Mexico at
the CCI***-W, CCI*** & CCI**** Level
(2) Eventing riders, owners, or lessees competing abroad
(3) Eventing riders applying/competing in selection trials for any FEI Championship
(this includes Pan American (PAG), Olympics and World Championships (WC),
except Young Rider Championship selection trials, however the North American
Young Rider Championships (NAYRC) and/or European Young Rider Championships
require IHP membership.
(4) Training Sessions organized by the High Performance Division of the
Federation
(5) IHP Grants

[JER]

Is anyone else bothered that one of the 'threats' to US success is the fact that selection isn't and can't be purely subjective?

Put another way, the HPP think the US would be more competitive if they were allowed to choose teams on a purely subjective basis.

Think about it. If selection procedures were actually less subjective and really based on performances at events such as the Olympic Selection Trials, the US would have been forced to cart a one-horse nobody like Jennifer Wooten and her non-'star' mare The Good Witch all the way to HK for the Olympics.

Shiver. Me. Timbers.
:lol:

[CookiePony]

Dragging this up again since I was surfing around the USEF site...

I wonder who gathered the data and wrote this? Was there a consultant?

Anyway, the SWOT analysis is interesting:
1. SWOT Analysis

Strengths:
• Our series of domestic competitions including an annual Spring CCI**** (Olympic Level)
• Selection Procedure/Selection Committee
• The number of riders we have successfully competing at the CCI**** level
• Coaching at the upper levels
• Course advisor programs for cross country and show jumping
• Good upper level courses
• Support Staff (Team Manager, Veterinarian, Farrier, Coach, Stable Manager)
• Funding/Sponsorship
• Owner tax break/Horse Foundations
• Development of the Eventing Owners’ Task Force

Weaknesses:
• A general lack of understanding and motivation of what it takes to be competitive in
international competition
• Coaching at lower levels
• Substandard lower level courses
• Not enough Funding/Sponsorship of riders or events
• Don’t have enough “Stars” to build a Team around
• Lack of Horsemanship among riders
• Development of upcoming riders is stagnant
• Lack resources to attain and then develop the young horses we have in US
• Not enough events/not enough good courses
• Riders don’t have self-motivation
• Distance between events
• Prize money

Opportunities:
• CCI****’s in Spring (Rolex) and Fall (TBD)
• Young/Developing Riders
• Good riders with good horses
• Disposable income
• Encourage riders to make and develop their own horses
• Volunteers
• Untapped PR/Marketing/Funding/Sponsorship initiatives
• Utilize available resources (professionals from other disciplines)
• Utilize Owners Task Force to foster syndication of horses and educate owners to tax
breaks

Threats:
• Will never have the flexibility in our Selection Procedures as other competitive countries do
• International Federation (mismanagement of the sport)
• Public perception with regard to the relative safety of Eventing
• Fewer top horses available – and keeping them USA owned and ridden
• Population growth/loss of land
• Lack of volunteers
• Loss of upper level competition venues makes it difficult to horse/rider combinations to
prepare for international competition
• A “zero tolerance” drugs and medication program implemented by our IF that does not
provide for necessary acceptable tolerances for some substances critical to the success
and well being of our horses
• Lottery funding of other nations


Some of the Weaknesses are puzzling to me. Do we have poor coaching at lower levels? Do we have "substandard" lower-level courses? What does "substandard mean-- not tough enough?

Under Threats, where is the "lack of volunteers" being felt the most? At UL events? What kind of volunteers?

I'm not sure I'm going anywhere in particular with this, just musing and wondering. Where did this data come from? Does it make sense?

[1516]

Your comment on Jennifer Wooten and The Good Witch makes no sense whatsoever!

Did you see them perform at the selection trials at The Fork last summer? Did you see them at Rolex 08, or Pau 07? What do you know about her other horses? Or hey, why don't you look up the The Good Witch's record, and then call her a "no star" mare! You are ridiculous!!!

[harveyhorses]

Your comment on Jennifer Wooten and The Good Witch makes no sense whatsoever!

Did you see them perform at the selection trials at The Fork last summer? Did you see them at Rolex 08, or Pau 07? What do you know about her other horses? Or hey, why don't you look up the The Good Witch's record, and then call her a "no star" mare! You are ridiculous!!!

Perhaps tounge in cheek????:eek:

[1516]

I certainly hope so!:D

[eventrider]

I am not speaking for JER, but I believe that she is on the same team you are. I think she said ALL of that with sarcasm, meaning that if the USEF did base their team on performance, Jennifer would have been on the team because she has been doing well, that she is NOT a no-name. Please read the post again with a little objectivity and see the winky smile emotican.

Christan

[LLDM]

Your comment on Jennifer Wooten and The Good Witch makes no sense whatsoever!

Did you see them perform at the selection trials at The Fork last summer? Did you see them at Rolex 08, or Pau 07? What do you know about her other horses? Or hey, why don't you look up the The Good Witch's record, and then call her a "no star" mare! You are ridiculous!!!

Um, pretty sure JER was being facetious. Very facetious. She does that. Gotta watch her like a hawk. ;)

SCFarm

[1516]

OK, I see what you mean and certainly hope that's what JER meant!

I just couldn't believe that was serious because Jennifer and The Witch had done so well!

[Gry2Yng]

I find it interesting that the strengths can generally be categorized as Federation related and the weaknesses are rider/owner and FEI related.

Nothing like refusing to take responsibility.

[GotSpots]

Gry, you don't agree that "coaching at the upper levels" is one of our strengths? And gosh, I'd sure like to know more about "owner tax breaks" - that would have come in handy...oh wait. Except they don't really exist for Joe Regular Owner. As for the number of U.S. horses and riders "successfully competing" at the four star level, they must have been at a different Rolex than the rest of us.

[TB or not TB?]

I wonder what color the sky is in their world?

[JER]

Your comment on Jennifer Wooten and The Good Witch makes no sense whatsoever!..... You are ridiculous!!!

:cry::cry::cry::cry:

Well, I've been called worse things than merely 'ridiculous'.

But yes, I was joking. I even included a :lol: to prove it. I thought it was pretty darn rotten that Ms. Wooten and her Witch could win the selection outing and then not be selected for the team.

And I think the SWOT analysis is pretty weird. I think it's really a CYA analysis.

[1516]

JER - OK, so....... great to hear we're on the same page regarding The Good Witch!

I agree, she and Jennifer certainly deserved to be on that team.

[Fence2Fence]

Riders don't have self-motivation.....whaaaa?

[harveyhorses]

It seems like a CYA analysis or perhaps a fruitbat analysis...
Maybe too many horses make it all the way around those substandard LLCs.
How can we have as a strength # of riders competing at CCI****, but not enough 'stars' to build a team around? Are they supposed to be on our wheaties boxes?
I guess I am not elite enough to understand these thing.

[flutie1]

"... As for the number of U.S. horses and riders "successfully competing" at the four star level, they must have been at a different Rolex than the rest of us."

You've got that right Spot!

Flutie

[CookiePony]

What strikes me about some of these bullet points is that they are functionally empty-- like someone, somewhere, has something specific in mind behind them, but most of us reading do not have the benefit of this knowledge.

For example, the supposed lack of good LL courses. Huh? All of the LL courses I have been around lately have been great to ride around, and left me more confident than before. Oops, except one of those was Jumping Branch, which I think was deemed too easy by certain people.

Here is another one I don't get, under Weaknesses: "A general lack of understanding and motivation of what it takes to be competitive in
international competition." What does this mean? Do we only have lazy ULRs who do not work hard on their skills? Funny, the ones I have met tend to be fairly motivated and hard working.

Now, "disposable income" is something I can get as an Opportunity. But whose disposable income, and for what purposes? The general American public (in spite of the economy)? Who is likely to want to share their income (or wealth, they are two different things), and for what purposes? Do we need quality horses? Travel funds? Salaries for support staff (what jobs, and how much?). Yes, I know a SWOT cannot have all of these details, but how about "wealth of individuals and companies who are friendly to Eventing that could fund horses, travel abroad, and training opportunities" as something a little more concrete?

Maybe this is nitpicky, but I have already come out as a nerd on this board, and I admit I am on a strategic planning committee for my church. But hey, even my little church strategic planning process was able to come up with a SWOT that was a little more thoughtful, and reflective of reality, than this. One key difference: the committee that was selected by the Board was a group of members who were committed but had little stake in particular outcomes of the process. For this High Performance SWOT, there is no indication of who wrote it and where they got their data, et alone what their stake in the process is.

[bornfreenowexpensive]

For example, the supposed lack of good LL courses. Huh? .


Remember....for this analysis....LL courses probably means Prelim-Advanced. CCI*-CCI***. NOT novice and training level HTs. It is talking about prepping horses/riders to be future **** international horses.....most horses with that level of talent do not spend much time at all running around novice. The fences are way too small....they do however need to spend time at Prelim and Intermediate. And for riders...same thing....while novice and training levels are important as well...you really have different skills that need to be developed that you really only start working on once you hit Prelim and above (or that is when your lack of those skills really starts to become apparent). The future **** riders need to develop at the Prelim-Adv levels...with lots of time at the Prelim/Intermediate to hone those skills... the need courses that are simple and ones that challenge...ones that don't have atmosphere and then a lot that do....long before they become truly competitive at the international level. I agree with this point. There are fairly limited opportuntities and good courses for the CCI*-CCI*** here in the US compared with Europe.

I didn't see anything surprising in this analysis.....also really didn't see any great solutions either though. Biggest issue that affects the US......not surprisingly is $$$$. And it isn't unique to just eventing in the US...but really many elite level sports.

[CookiePony]

There are fairly limited opportuntities and good courses for the CCI*-CCI*** here in the US compared with Europe.


This statement is so much more precise than the current one, and makes much more sense to me.

ETA: I don't know why I care about this, except that a USEF committee went to the trouble to create and post the document, but it just doesn't seem up to the task.

[Janet]

Riders don’t have self-motivation
The cynic in me says that this means " riders are not willing to push their horses faster for the good of the team"

[SevenDogs]

The cynic in me says that this means " riders are not willing to push their horses faster for the good of the team"

BINGO!!! Riders not willing to blindly follow team leadership.

Which section of the plan sets the goal of not killing/seriously injuring our upper level horses/riders? I see that as BOTH a threat AND a weakness.

[CookiePony]

Countries that are also consistently competitive in international team competitions are Great Britain, France, Germany, New Zealand and Australia. On any given day, any of these countries could produce a winning team. The soundness of horses is vitally important to the success of these top nations. One or two key horses becoming unavailable for competition for any of these
nations can significantly affect their chances for medals. The US is fortunate to have one of the best back up teams in the world. Our team of veterinarians and our farrier are second to none. (pg.2)


Given that soundness is such an influential factor, are there any management strategies or practices that we could utilize to imprive our chances in this regard? For instance, making sure that short-listed horses do not have to peak both at a selection trial and then again at the actual target competition only a couple of months later?

[FlightCheck]

Given that soundness is such an influential factor, are there any management strategies or practices that we could utilize to imprive our chances in this regard? For instance, making sure that short-listed horses do not have to peak both at a selection trial and then again at the actual target competition only a couple of months later?


Bing! Bing! Bing!

We have a winner!!

[Jealoushe]

Don’t have enough “Stars” to build a Team around
• Lack of Horsemanship among riders
• Development of upcoming riders is stagnant
• Lack resources to attain and then develop the young horses we have in US


Well MAYBE if they would give some nobodys a chance, they would be able to gain the experience that could make them, a "star".

Perhaps let those with good horse/horses go to some other team events other than the first string who ALWAYS get to go regardless of what horse they are riding.

Didn't it used to be that your record was what got you to the team, now it's just your "name".

Once again they show they could care less about the actual sport, as long as they look good and WIN.

[Eventer5]

Its interesting that they have a whole plan for winning while saftey and the large amount of deaths/injuries gets half a bullet point's worth of attention.

[SevenDogs]

Public perception with regard to the relative safety of Eventing

Not even sure I would give this half a bullet point credit. This says "we don't have a safety problem -- it's just a pesky perception problem. We need to train the public better."

Perhaps the "Toughen up, Cupcake" program is the their plan to overcome this one.

[SuZQuzie]

Regarding to the Witch and Wooten not going to the Olympics, the exact same thing happened with Miles and McKinlaigh in 2004. She wasn't "in" yet, despite nearly flawless performances up till then. They then let her go this year simply because they had so many other big names have to pull out (Darren, O'Connor on Teddy, Severson...). She was the next best thing. And guess how she ended up doing in competition compared to those wearing the bigger britches.

Really, it was a case of the stars lining up correctly to get a new name like Gina out there. It SHOULDN'T be that way. I agree with others, those that make the team should have done by means of performance, not political connections.

Also, not to be age biased, but if you look at the ages of the members of the USET in the 80's and 90's, they were much younger than those of today. And Miles was the youngest for the US at the Olympics... Just look at Rolex, the youngsters have been holding their own and BEATING the big names.

[fitzwilliam]

• Encourage riders to make and develop their own horses

This is part of the plan yet, to date, they seem to penalize the "one horse wonders" who are not big names with strings of horses.

[piaffeprincess98]

• Encourage riders to make and develop their own horses

This is part of the plan yet, to date, they seem to penalize the "one horse wonders" who are not big names with strings of horses.

It's probably about time. It takes time to make a horse, and the team can't wait around I guess. Don't a lot of our ULR go to Europe to buy made horses?

I agree with the bullet point, but the selectors seem to be contradicting that by not choosing/rewarding the "one horse wonders", most of whom were probably brought up from youngsters.

[bornfreenowexpensive]

It's probably about time. It takes time to make a horse, and the team can't wait around I guess. Don't a lot of our ULR go to Europe to buy made horses?

.


My experience is that most of them do bring along their own.....and actually PREFER to ride one that they have brought along. Look at the entries at many of the HTs....Phillip, Boyd, Karen, Buck, Amy.....many more UL riders all riding novice, training etc. horses. (Don't many threads on this board bitch about having to ride against them when the HTs don't offer Rider or Ammy divisions).

It isn't unusual at all for them to make a horse up from scratch or almost scratch. Also common is to get one that has say maybe gone as high as Prelim or perhaps intermediate...and then finish the training. That is NOT buying a made **** horse. It isn't all THAT hard to bring up a horse to Prelim or even intermediate....a whole lot of riders...including many ammies...can do that fairly easily....what is harder is the next steps that make them a **** horse and competitive internationally.

I'm not saying it that folks don't buy made **** horses...especially in the year before the Olympics.....but many of those same riders are also bringing along youngsters.

What is more impressive than the "one hit wonders" are the riders and trainers that can produce MULTIPLE horses to that level. That it isn't a fluke that they got there...or that they only got there because they are sitting on an exceptional horse (I'm NOT thinking of any one in particular). Look a Bruce...Buck...Phillip etc.....those are riders that consistently produce **** horses. You give them the raw material in horse flesh (doesn't need to be an exceptional horse)....and they will be competitive at that level....give them an exceptional horse and they will be hard to beat.

What is hard is for the new comers to prove that they also have the ability to do that....when they might not have the $$$$ or sponsors yet to give them the source of decent horse flesh or $$$ to keep their horses long enough to GET to that level (without having to sell their good ones)....or to prove that they not dependent on sitting on exceptional horses to get to that level. That is the nasty circle that some good and talented riders find themselves.

ETA: And I think that there is probably some thought about wasting the team resources on a rider who may be gone tomorrow when their exceptional horse is no longer in the game......just a thought (and not saying it is right).

[piaffeprincess98]

My experience is that most of them do bring along their own.....and actually PREFER to ride one that they have brought along. Look at the entries at many of the HTs....Phillip, Boyd, Karen, Buck, Amy.....many more UL riders all riding novice, training etc. horses. (Don't many threads on this board bitch about having to ride against them when the HTs don't offer Rider or Ammy divisions).

It isn't unusual at all for them to make a horse up from scratch or almost scratch. Also common is to get one that has say maybe gone as high as Prelim or perhaps intermediate...and then finish the training. That is NOT buying a made **** horse. It isn't all THAT hard to bring up a horse to Prelim or even intermediate....a whole lot of riders...including many ammies...can do that fairly easily....what is harder is the next steps that make them a **** horse and competitive internationally.

I'm not saying it that folks don't buy made **** horses...especially in the year before the Olympics.....but many of those same riders are also bringing along youngsters.
True. I just said that because my trainer who is also buys and sells a lot with the BNR's is always telling me about how so-and-so came back from a buying trip in Europe or South America, etc. Aren't a lot of those horses that are brought up w/ BNR's sold to ammies, etc as packers before they make it to the big time or once it has been realized that they won't be a big time horse?