PDA

View Full Version : Annual Meeting Debrief



Pol
Dec. 14, 2003, 11:35 AM
SOOOO, Who thought what was the best/worst part of the Big Meeting?
All of the seminars I attended were interesting and worthwhile, I wish each one could have been longer....I had the feeling that discussions would just get going when it would be time to clear the room for the next meeting.
Congratulations to all the honor winners. I hope you long-distance travelers got home safely and found the meeting worth the trip. Many thanks to all of our friends in Area 1 who pulled off the biggest meeting in history, and thanks to all who came! Reports, please!

Pol
Dec. 14, 2003, 11:35 AM
SOOOO, Who thought what was the best/worst part of the Big Meeting?
All of the seminars I attended were interesting and worthwhile, I wish each one could have been longer....I had the feeling that discussions would just get going when it would be time to clear the room for the next meeting.
Congratulations to all the honor winners. I hope you long-distance travelers got home safely and found the meeting worth the trip. Many thanks to all of our friends in Area 1 who pulled off the biggest meeting in history, and thanks to all who came! Reports, please!

barbaraG
Dec. 14, 2003, 01:34 PM
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I had a Wonderful time at the National Meeting!! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif getting to see Everyone was Great!! People talked all weekend!! Even in the lines for the Ladies Room!! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

Folks from all over the Country!! Had dinner with people from Washington State and California!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Sometimes, the meetings I wanted to attend were planned at the same time as another meeting I wanted to attend! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

The GP and I divided and Conquered!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Instead of a Thursday, how about starting on a Wednesday??

Munchies every morning would be nice too! But more expensive!

Big writing pads for everyone would be nice, although we brought our own.


Congrats to Area I for a Great Job!! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

BarbaraG
GWV/ home at last http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Robby Johnson
Dec. 14, 2003, 02:34 PM
We just got home a few hours ago and fortunately got out of Boston this a.m. before the snow. Still, the security group at Logan was way behind and we almost missed our flight. Otherwise it was smooth sailing, though it was snowing in Cincinnati.

The meeting was great. After participating two years, I would like to recommend the "cluster track" type of format wherein the conference topics are arranged by appeal groups (adult amateur, USET riders, organizers, etc.) and possibly presented in a color-coded format. A person could still go to any meeting, but it might provide some continuity and avoid duplicate scheduling (such as GWV alluded to).

It was fantastic to be in Boston and we did get a few moments to shop and take it the holiday season in the neat Back Bay area.

I always love meeting new folks and seeing familiar faces and of course I've now met way too many to attempt to name but suffice it to say I had a fantastic time meeting PGM and hanging out with him on Thursday night. Pol was great as was, as always Mary in Area 1 and her lovely family. Great New Englanders!

Good job USEA! Love to everyone I saw at the meeting. Flutie, email me sister. Wish I could've spent more time with you too!

Also, must say I was stoked to meet Hilary in person as we've been email buddies for years and years (I sent her a wedding gift years ago and just met her for the first time this weekend!).

Working with Dale in Area 1 was great too. It's always fun to collaborate.

And guess what else? On our flight from Boston to Cinci the flight attendant noticed our USEA bag and had all sorts of questions. Turns out she rides and her daughters Pony Club but she didn't know much about the USEA. So I gave her the pitch and the website and we had a lengthy chat about riding, etc. Maybe they'll cross over and become members.

Heather, luvyameanit!

Kristin, you're the best!

Beth Lendrum and oskaar - if you got anymore fabulous I'd implode!

Janet, your ability to see the big picture by dissecting the details amazes and inspires me! May you always have that talent. Your horses must really be amazing!

Can't wait for next year! San Francisco will be a great venue.

Robby

So I'm a sistah, buy things with cash
It doesn't mean that all my credit's bad

http://community.webshots.com/user/rbjohnsonii

SportsfieldEventer
Dec. 14, 2003, 04:21 PM
I am just glad I finally got to go to one of the national meetings!

There were a lot of really interesting workshops, but unfortunately I missed a few because they were so early. I wasn't staying at the hotel which made it a little harder to get there in the morning, but that is just a selfish complaint.

I really liked the eventing retrospective slide show. I thought they did a great job of putting it together and Denny was hilarious.

The main thing that sticks out in my mind that could have been different was the Hall of Fame inductions. Wow, it took a loooong time! I enjoyed hearing stories from the past, but I think there should have been some time limit for the speakers. I was looking forward to the party after, but I think everyone had been in that room so long that they just left after the inductions.

I look forward to going again because it is loads of fun to see so many eventers out of the barn! It was like one, long competitors party without the show jumping the next morning (thank goodness!)

Robby Johnson
Dec. 15, 2003, 03:51 AM
p.s. I loved meeting Bensmom and Mellsmom too! Mellsmom, I got your call for help and it was right on the cusp of assisting John with his raffle. I'm so sorry I failed you on hair/makeup but I don't think you needed any help!

Robby

So I'm a sistah, buy things with cash
It doesn't mean that all my credit's bad

http://community.webshots.com/user/rbjohnsonii

weezie
Dec. 15, 2003, 05:05 AM
Didn't anyone take pictures of people in their fancy duds on Saturday night??? Inquiring minds want to know....

Pol
Dec. 15, 2003, 05:41 AM
Hey, does anybody know who was in charge of the raffle? Rumor has it that I won 2 prizes!! I would love to gather them up. I have never won a raffle in my life! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Hilary
Dec. 15, 2003, 06:20 AM
This was the first meeting I've been to and I had a wonderful time. Low point was trying to find something to at least alleviate my cold symptoms without making me dizzy - (so if I appeared to be wandering in a daze at any point I was overdosed on sudafed).

There were too many hight points - meeting Robby (FINALLY!), talking with Karen O'Connor in the aquarium (I admit to being rather star-struck much of the time, but she was the only one I actually had a conversation with) and I love the retrospective - I remember that ENORMOUS Slide/drop thing at Vershire! I can't believe we jumped all that stuff back then. People today would have heart attacks.

Had I known that 1987 was considered old, I had photos of Doornhof and Merry Meadow events - but I'm not as exciting to see as the big guys!

I am going to have to rag on my coach about her horse's flying long mane in one of those old photos. Styles have changed!

I did think the Hall of Fame was long (some people are better speakers than others.. . ) so I was too tired to dance, but I enjoyed it anyway.

I had lunch with Bensmom and Mellsmom - it was really nice to meet them (and yes, we talked about feet!)

I saw BarbaraG & her Warren, too. Too many people to talk to and not enough time.

I hope you all got home safely - it's still snowing here and we've got not quite a foot of snow.

mellsmom
Dec. 15, 2003, 06:29 AM
RJ-

I will forgive you, BUT I had so wanted to complete my Hoochie Momma look Saturday night. I did actually see you from far away assisting with prizes so I knew that you didn't blow me off!!! In fact I am sure that if Bensmom and I hadn't made that wild dash out to the Dover store in Wellesly, I'd have had time. And yes, we managed to set an all time record for speed shopping. In fact, I may just do that from now on... although for Bensmom, she can still do a lot of damage in 42 minutes.
We did not get pictures of us dressed up despite Bensmom's camera.
I will sadly admit that the fashion police were firmly planted at our table. We were in the back and could see everyone on the way to and from the bar. I will pass on one gem they managed to share "the difference between Hoochie Mamma and Rental is a bra".
YOu may all rest at ease that there is still a whole lot of partying going on in the eventing ranks. Sadly I had to leave at 11:30 before the end of the hall of fame inductions to pack for my 6:30 am departure and I missed the dancing...did anyone remain upright that long?

"I've got a holiday, a paid holiday, I've got a holiday in my head"

Don't like my riding? Call 1-800- phh- fftt

frugalannie
Dec. 15, 2003, 07:17 AM
I'm so sad that I couldn't attend any of the parties. How was the Aquarium bash? I've heard that the Hall of Fame Gala lived up to it's name.

I only managed to attend on Friday and Sunday, but I was impressed by the conviviality of the crowd, the breadth of presentations and the quality of the information being shared. I think that all of the sessions I went to were SRO with the exception of Sport Horse Breeding (which had a larger room that most but was disadvantaged by the bad weather moving in) and the session on The Big Picture which was in a HUGE room, and turned out to be a bit more about the media and sponsorship than the name might have implied. Two quick points out of that one: Why DO so many people watch dog shows on TV, and so few watch horse events? And we need to develop a program to prepare riders for interviews and presentations. It ain't easy to get up there, hold an audience and seem natural, and although we have some folks who are very good at it, we would benefit by having even more comfortable with those situations. This is not a knock on anyone!!! Everyone who stood up and shared their knowledge and reminisces (sp?) gets a hearty round of applause and my appreciation.

And three huge cheers for Weezo for putting the whole thing together http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif.

oskaar
Dec. 15, 2003, 07:59 AM
Hard work and fun to be had by all!!! Pol, call the USEA office--they have all the raffle stuff. I am SO disappointed that I didn't get the saddle. But, yay to whomever did. A few of my highlights, including the things I learned:

1) Shopping on Newbury with Robby rocks (well, he rocks in general). I had a ton of funny quotes to share, but they were erased by a bottle of Maker's Mark. He bought a delicious pair of Cole Haan's, and I'm very jealous.

2) Jack LeGoff telling me that I am both talented AND amazing. Of course, he was referring to my excellent klepto skills and my ability to steal Christmas decorations out of the lobby, but hey, I'll take what I can get.

3) There should be time limits on speeches made at Hall of Fame Galas. All in all a very nice ceremony (yes, I cried a few times), despite running a hair long). I was especially touched by the tribute to Bally Cor (what an incredible mare who was truly courageous), and by listening to the stories of the great comraderie shared between Denny, Jimmy, the 3 Mikes (Huber, Page, Plumb), and Tad Coffin under the guidance of LeGoff.

4) Denny has a fabulous Irish brogue.

5) It IS possible to laugh so hard that you can't breathe and you think you are going to have a hernia (can women even get those?).

6) Area I really knows how to throw a classy gig. What a great weekend. The only let down was that I was not able to fit my mattress from the Sheridan in my suitcase. It was so comfy!

7) Eventers know how to have a great time, and they really are the most fun people you can find!

Hurrah for Boston!

Now, he said he needs a Master CD to make copies. Is that like the brand? Aren't they all the same?-- my boss

[This message was edited by oskaar on Dec. 15, 2003 at 11:07 AM.]

Robby Johnson
Dec. 15, 2003, 08:07 AM
oskaar, I miss you and your mommy already!!!!! You are both the best. Please tell Billy Boyd Boyd Boyd to call me when he comes back to the Rock.

I also feel like I should say to everyone, in a blanket statement, that if you encountered me and I seemed a little drunk it's probably because I was. I promise I'm not a regular lush.

I must also say that I positively love Jennifer Akers, who does so much for our organization, and loved seeing Miss Kyra King Stuart again as well.

Robby

So I'm a sistah, buy things with cash
It doesn't mean that all my credit's bad

http://community.webshots.com/user/rbjohnsonii

Dale Area 1
Dec. 15, 2003, 08:57 AM
I loved meeting everyone at the meeting http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif I wish I was able to meet more folks, but I was in a daze also before the booze! Worked late the entire week, closed on the farm that friday, etc.

Mary and Pol -- I still owe you both a drink!

Robby -- Loved working with you on our presentation, we made a great team. I received a lot of feedback from participants that we were right on the mark -- http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Hillary, So great to see you again!! We need to keep in touch better! You hair was fabulous at the Gala!

Called in sick today at work, have to plow and shovel two driveways now! Dale

Robby Johnson
Dec. 15, 2003, 09:00 AM
Dale,

Have some special coffee, say hello to The Shannon Diva, and stay warm!

Robby

So I'm a sistah, buy things with cash
It doesn't mean that all my credit's bad

http://community.webshots.com/user/rbjohnsonii

Dale Area 1
Dec. 15, 2003, 09:05 AM
I am having it as we speak http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Will give your regards to Shannon, isn't she great!

Did you get my voice mail message on your cell phone? I would love to work with you again in the future on USEA projects, BUT, you lead and I follow, since you know the organization and how it operates.

Send me an e-mail, off to pack. I just needed a break and special coffee http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Dale

mellsmom
Dec. 15, 2003, 09:43 AM
Just one more reminder that you never know who is reading your posts...the COTH BB was mentioned SEVERAL times in different sessions that I attended. Most notably in connection with the Mic Mar bit and the Event Ratings meeting.
I attended the sessions on selecting and event horse. It was quite interesting. Very valid points about ameturs needing to be open mided about what they look at. Everyone seemed to agree that temperament and tractability were key in ammy horses. There was also a lovely comment by Buck Davidson that you should change your mind set when looking to buy. Think of it as an opportunity to sit on a wide variety of horses. :-) Something many ammys don't get to do. Also, all the panelists said that if you get off the hore and your gut doesn't tell you that you will enjoy looking at the horse and riding it every day, keep walking. You should wake up excited about the prospect of riding the horse.
The bitting presentation was also good, but I wanted MORE!!!! I would love to see USEA spend some more of our money funding the research a bit longer. I would love to see them crunch some more numbers and see if there are correlations and statistical significance in some of the findings. Honestly, I think someone could make a career out of this work.
The braiding and grooming demo was cool as well. I would love to see her again in a hands on situation where the participants could spend time actually practising the skills she shows.
Thank goodness I have my notes. I wonder if we should post a notes area since there weren't handout at many of the meetings.

"I've got a holiday, a paid holiday, I've got a holiday in my head"

Don't like my riding? Call 1-800- phh- fftt

mellsmom
Dec. 15, 2003, 09:43 AM
Just one more reminder that you never know who is reading your posts...the COTH BB was mentioned SEVERAL times in different sessions that I attended. Most notably in connection with the Mic Mar bit and the Event Ratings meeting.
I attended the sessions on selecting and event horse. It was quite interesting. Very valid points about ameturs needing to be open mided about what they look at. Everyone seemed to agree that temperament and tractability were key in ammy horses. There was also a lovely comment by Buck Davidson that you should change your mind set when looking to buy. Think of it as an opportunity to sit on a wide variety of horses. :-) Something many ammys don't get to do. Also, all the panelists said that if you get off the hore and your gut doesn't tell you that you will enjoy looking at the horse and riding it every day, keep walking. You should wake up excited about the prospect of riding the horse.
The bitting presentation was also good, but I wanted MORE!!!! I would love to see USEA spend some more of our money funding the research a bit longer. I would love to see them crunch some more numbers and see if there are correlations and statistical significance in some of the findings. Honestly, I think someone could make a career out of this work.
The braiding and grooming demo was cool as well. I would love to see her again in a hands on situation where the participants could spend time actually practising the skills she shows.
Thank goodness I have my notes. I wonder if we should post a notes area since there weren't handout at many of the meetings.

"I've got a holiday, a paid holiday, I've got a holiday in my head"

Don't like my riding? Call 1-800- phh- fftt

DizzyMagic
Dec. 15, 2003, 10:19 AM
Sounds like you all had an awesome time - notwithstanding the inopportune bad weather!! I had so hoped to come this time, but family obligations prevented it.

I would love to know more about the seminars on The Big Picture and Eventing and US Media - those are two I really was keen to attend.

Emily

"It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it is because we do not dare that they are difficult" - Seneca

GatoGordo
Dec. 15, 2003, 01:12 PM
OK, really stupid question here, when is it Area II's turn to host it? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

There are only two types of eventers out there: Those who have fallen in the water jump and those that will. -- subk
Founding Member, Bird Nerd Clique; Eventing Yahoo In Training; formerly known as BostonGold

Pol
Dec. 15, 2003, 02:10 PM
DALE, Don't think for a minute that Mary and I didn't notice you skipped out without buying our drinks. It was a nice move on your part, but one thing we don't forget is drinks-owed-us-by-others! We'll gitcha. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Janet
Dec. 15, 2003, 02:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GatoGordo:
OK, really stupid question here, when is it Area II's turn to host it? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Area II hosted it a few years ago, in Pittsburg.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

sulsa
Dec. 15, 2003, 02:33 PM
who is COTH BB?

Janet
Dec. 15, 2003, 02:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sulsa:
who is COTH BB?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>WE are COTH BB

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

Pol
Dec. 15, 2003, 02:50 PM
sulsa-
Chronicle Of The Horse Bulletin Board

Phew, that was hard! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

barbaraG
Dec. 15, 2003, 02:57 PM
Welcome, Sulsa!!

BarbaraG
GWV/ http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

All these riders are mine! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

sulsa
Dec. 15, 2003, 03:08 PM
what was said about the mickmar and event ratings

canterlope
Dec. 15, 2003, 03:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Janet:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GatoGordo:
OK, really stupid question here, when is it Area II's turn to host it? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Area II hosted it a few years ago, in Pittsburg.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The last time Area II hosted the Annual Meeting was in Reston VA in 1996 and it will be a few years before we have the chance to do it again. Next year the annual meeting will take place in San Francisco and in 2005 it may be in New Orleans.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They say cats have nine lives. They would settle for one good one. Adopt a cat (or dog) today.

pgm
Dec. 15, 2003, 04:00 PM
For the record, anyone who missed Canterlope in that vintage Ginger Rodgers glamor drag needs to get a grip and find a pic. That girl can dress it up and take it walking with the best of them.

You the bomb girl.

pgm
Dec. 15, 2003, 04:05 PM
Canterlope:

Reston?!!! You've got to be kidding me! What was it, the Stepford convention? Geez.

I can think of at least five major cities that would be better (in order of preference: D.C, Philadelphia, Raleigh, Baltimore and Richmond.)

Heather
Dec. 15, 2003, 04:31 PM
It was a super convention, weather notwithstanding, and I give great kudos to the organizers. Great talks, great, but generally civil debates, and lots of fun.

DC you looked so gorgeous on Saturday night!

Robby you know I love you baby, and say hi to The Man for me.

Mary, it was super to finally put a face to a name.

pcm--we were on different sides of a few issues, but you were a true gentleman and I appreciate all your work. If you ever need another committee member, give me a call.

I'm sorry I didn't get to meet more folks, but it was a BUSY weekend.

And next year, in SF, my old home area, drinks are on ME! I am SOOO excited to get to go "home" for the convention next year!

pgm
Dec. 15, 2003, 04:55 PM
You mean I wasn't condescending and rude? Go figure?

And by the way, you had your own va va va voom going on there Saturday night.

Heather
Dec. 15, 2003, 06:48 PM
No, you weren't either of those, but of course flattery will get you everywhere http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif.

Can I bring up one small negative, thought not AT ALL the fault of any organizer.

People, are you all really living such high powered lives that you can't turn your cell phones off for even a few hours? Seriously, in every sinlge meeting or forum I was in, there were repeated interrupstions from people's cell phones going off--and no, "vibrate' is not the answer, because these people still disrupt everyone around them by answering and talking on the phone (or crawling over an entire row of people in order to go out and talk on the phone).

I know I am a fossilized fud (tm Dave Barry) in the cell department--talking on the phone is a big part of my job and I hate it, so I'm not about to give other people an easy way to reach me constantly--because they would do it! I don't have voice mail on my cell, and I rarely leave it on for incoming calls. Mainly, it's there for me to use to make calls on the road, and for emergencies. Mr. heather doesn't even know his cell phone number, so he's even more fossilized than me.

But seriously, unless you are a medical doctor who is on call, or work in such a rare field that lives hang on your availability, I simply can't imagine that something is THAT important as to disrupt an entire room of other people. Please, just turn the d@mn thing off, and check for dropped calls when the meeting is over!

Bensmom
Dec. 15, 2003, 08:59 PM
pgm -- I agree -- canterlope *did* look gorgeous on Saturday night. It was an amazing dress. Funny, I find I keep agreeing with you. Weird. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I was a bit embarrassed that I didn't last through the whole Gala on Saturday. My tablemates were unaware, I think, of my lightweight status and outdid themselves attempting to bribe me into agreeing to take on a herculean task. It worked, but I probably should have stopped the persuading-by-buying-drinks sooner http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

I was thrilled to finally get to meet Robby, and delighted to meet Janet and Gillian and to have lunch with Hilary was really cool. It was funny to have barged in on a table of strangers, only to discover I was sitting next to Clancy and Star's "mom" who I've "known" for a really long time! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I did more shopping than was healthy and of course, was disappointed that I didn't get to meet more of y'all -- at one point I almost wrote "Bensmom" on my name tag http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif Heather, I think I passed you in the hall once, but didn't get to find you and introduce myself.

I was more than a bit bummed that my friend had to rush home to see about her hubby who thought it was a good idea to wreck his motorcycle in the middle of the reception Thursday night &lt;sheesh&gt; but Mellsmom, the crew from Rocking Horse and Poplar, and my own Red Hills crew did an admirable job of adopting me and convincing me to have a good time anyway. Of course, Neiman's and Saks, and Dover didn't hurt either http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

I don't know that we will make the trip westward next year (though I'm already working on that concept) but I think it would be really cool to meet even more COTH folks.

Libby (who probably would have met more folks if she hadn't been in the mall quite so much http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

*Proud member of the Hoof Fetish Clique*

BBowen
Dec. 15, 2003, 10:01 PM
Well, like everyone else, I really enjoyed my first meeting. It was great to see old friends and meet new ones. Robby, as always, it was wonderful seeing you. Seemed like we were always meeting in the hall. Thanks for the help at the raffle.

I finally got to me BarbaraG and Warren. I was going to make it a point to meet her and she and Warren were at registration the same time I was.

The only problem I had, several of the programs I wanted to see were overlapping with meetings I had to attend. Oh well.

I can't wait until San Francisco.

Becky

flutie
Dec. 16, 2003, 06:02 AM
pgm - we MUST get to work on those ubermensche uniforms, Heather, I couldn't agree with you more about the cell phone distraction, and
Canterlope - you're my hero!

Flutie

mellsmom
Dec. 16, 2003, 06:08 AM
It looks as though some sorf of event rating concept will go forward, HOWEVER I think the biggest factor will be determining what exactly the system should be. IT seems that the phrase has been used to encompass MANY different ideas, all of which can't be streamlined into one idea. Bensmom was in more of the meeting than I was and as such should give a synopsis.

THe Micmar will be available nationally I do believe from a catalogue :-) Robby, do you know details on this, I didn't write down exactly what was said in refuse to misquote. I would expect though that there will be some publicity about the cause and effect of it about that time. It sounded intriguing, but of course like 99% of all bits will undoubtedly not come in gargantuan sizes, like 6. so I didn't get too enthralled by the discussion as I won't be able to have one anyway.

"I've got a holiday, a paid holiday, I've got a holiday in my head"

Don't like my riding? Call 1-800- phh- fftt

Bensmom
Dec. 16, 2003, 06:29 AM
The Mikmar came up in two sessions that I sat in on. In the Training Strategies session, one of the first questions Darren was asked was about his bit and he made reference to the discussion that had taken place here on COTH about it. He did explain why he liked it, and it sounded as if he had a well reasoned explanation for its use and it did sound intriguing.

The other time I was aware that it came up was when one of the organizers suggested that the COTH BB was a tremendous resource for putting out information and collecting opinions on rule changes and whatnot in the event ratings session. Darren made sort of a joke at that point about not believing everything you read here.

It was a good reminder that you never know who is out there reading what is posted here -- even if they only lurk.

*Proud member of the Hoof Fetish Clique*

Robby Johnson
Dec. 16, 2003, 06:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bensmom:
Darren made sort of a joke at that point about not believing everything you read here.

It was a good reminder that you never know who is out there reading what is posted here -- even if they only lurk.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I must say it's fantastic that our specialized, niche industry has a forum where individuals can dissect a LOT of opinions/information on our sport at their leisure and on their own time.

Marketing professionals literally would pay in gold for the ear of such a specialized group. Probably would pay more if, say, we were a rabid Justin Timberlake fan group, but you get the point ... where else can you test the pulse of a collective audience and get honest feedback?

Thankfully the TOS of the BB prevents us from being directly-solicited (that continues to be perceived as an invasion of privacy) but opinions can be formulated with a lot of criteria ... not just what is written.

I personally think actions speak louder than words. But I also think it's important that everyone speak with their own voice, ideas and opinions. We all have something to bring, and if you know something to be factual and worthy, don't let a "you never know who's watching" warning back you off.

Robby

So I'm a sistah, buy things with cash
It doesn't mean that all my credit's bad

http://community.webshots.com/user/rbjohnsonii

Bensmom
Dec. 16, 2003, 07:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Well, I must say it's fantastic that our specialized, niche industry has a forum where individuals can dissect a LOT of opinions/information on our sport at their leisure and on their own time.

Marketing professionals literally would pay in gold for the ear of such a specialized group. Probably would pay more if, say, we were a rabid Justin Timberlake fan group, but you get the point ... where else can you test the pulse of a collective audience and get honest feedback?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with this and I think it is a terrific place to take the pulse of what's going on. In fact, I think if you read things pretty carefully, it gives a more accurate picture of how the participants, especially at the lower levels, feel about the issues and incidents that confront our sport as a whole than perhaps some other folks do.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> But I also think it's important that everyone speak with their own voice, ideas and opinions. We all have something to bring, and if you know something to be factual and worthy, don't let a "you never know who's watching" warning back you off.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I totally agree with this as well, but I sensed some surprise in the room when Darren made reference to being aware of what was said here about him and about his bit in particular. I just think that sometimes here you will see things posted more readily that perhaps aren't factual and worthy simply because it appears to be an anonymous forum (i.e. the comments about the organizing committee at Foxhall back in the spring that I never could get the poster to give specifics on) I just try to not say things here that I wouldn't feel comfortable saying in person http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

And, Heather, I also agree about the phones -- I wore mine all weekend because I was trying to keep up with Kelley since she'd had to leave suddenly, but I did keep it on vibrate and the one time it rang, I quietly went outside the room to take the call. And, since I was waiting for news, I made sure to sit in a place that when I left the room, it would be with a minimum of disruption. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I'm always startled to hear one ring in a quiet room.

*Proud member of the Hoof Fetish Clique*

Bensmom
Dec. 16, 2003, 07:02 AM
Oh, and I think the Mikmar is already available in catalogs -- I know I have seen it in the one from Mary's Tack and Feed, and one other place . . .

*Proud member of the Hoof Fetish Clique*

LisaB
Dec. 16, 2003, 07:04 AM
Proper geek protocol states to turn all gadgets to vibrate during meetings and get-togethers. Then answer the geek contraption when you reach the outside of the meeting room. Gesh! I have to teach EVERYONE to be a proper geek?
Yours truly
Ms. Geek Manners

LisaB
Dec. 16, 2003, 07:36 AM
Robby! Shooting blanks is also personal. And would it really matter? I mean, he's not planning a family anytime soon, I don't think.

Robby Johnson
Dec. 16, 2003, 07:38 AM
It was a figure of speech - nothing literal. Deleted just because it occurred to me that it might be offensive to some readers.

R.

So I'm a sistah, buy things with cash
It doesn't mean that all my credit's bad

http://community.webshots.com/user/rbjohnsonii

weezie
Dec. 16, 2003, 08:06 AM
Rumors are the Mikmar is going to be featured on the cover of an upcoming Beval catalog.

Janet
Dec. 16, 2003, 08:08 AM
Ratings
I missed the ratings session- the biting session ran over and I couldn't drag myself away.

If anyone can summarize what happened there, I would be very interested.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

canterlope
Dec. 16, 2003, 09:37 AM
Oh My!

Where is that blushing icon when you need it? Your kind words have this small time country girl from the sticks a bit pink in the face. I was just trying to keep up with the rest of you. Besides, I had to give Mellsmom a run for her money in her bid for the 2003 USEA Hoochie Momma of the Year Award. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

For me, the biggest highlight of the meeting was getting to see all of my lovely friends and making new ones.

I was thrilled to finally meet the Great Warrior Volunteer and the Ground Pounder in person, although I may have frightened them a bit when I swooped down on them at the registration table with no warning and gave them big hugs.

Robby, you know I love you more than I love my luggage and you are, and will continue to be, the eventing diva I aspire to be. Don't forget that you owe me a copy of "the picture" of you and Rhodey.

And to everyone else who I'm not going to mention by name because it would take every bit of bandwidth the COTH BB has to fit you all in, seeing you at the meeting and getting to work side by side to try and move our sport to greater heights reaffirmed my belief that it is both an honor and a privilege to be fortunate enough to be a member of such a fine group of people.

Another highlight for me was seeing the autographed Rolex Book raise a pretty good chunk of change for the USEA Endowment when it was live auctioned during the raffle on Saturday night. I was positive that it would top out around $300 and was absolutely floored when it flew past that on its way to a final bid of $700. If any of you happen to see Chris Shaw, its new owner, please give him a hug for me and tell him I said, "You da man!".

One other highlight for me, and this one is purely personal, was watching my fabulous hubby receive the 2003 USEA Amateur Groom of the Year Award during the Luncheon on Saturday. I know I am a bit biased, but I can't think of any individual who is as deserving as he. The picture they showed on the big screen when he went up to accept his award said it all.

Flutie for President!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They say cats have nine lives. They would settle for one good one. Adopt a cat (or dog) today.

flutie
Dec. 16, 2003, 09:59 AM
Canterlope -

Flutie will only settle for the title of Czarina seeing as Event Goddess is deservedly bestowed upon Janie! And yes, Steve's picture up there brought tears even to my aging and World-weary eyes.

Love ya'

LisaB
Dec. 16, 2003, 10:07 AM
Canterlope, your hubby should get the groom's award for keeping your pinto so darn white. Now, is it the time to tell him about your other white wonder?

Jeannette, formerly ponygyrl
Dec. 16, 2003, 10:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Janet:
_Ratings_
I missed the ratings session- the biting session ran over and I couldn't drag myself away.

Janet
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The biting (sic) session, eh? Which one, pray tell, was that, and were any wounds inflicted??

Was it a "go for the throat" affair?? I've got some guesses who might have been involved, but since we never know who is reading these...http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Janet
Dec. 16, 2003, 10:41 AM
Sorry- that was supposed to be the "bitting session" with Dr. Clayton.

Actually, I suspect the rating session was teh "biting" one.

The amateur status session, as a separate session, got cancelled and moved into being an agenda item in the Board of Governors meeting, so fangs and claws were retracted (but statements still made).

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

canterlope
Dec. 16, 2003, 11:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The biting (sic) session, eh? Which one, pray tell, was that, and were any wounds inflicted?? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ROTFLMAO and gasping for air. I think I just passed half of a cheese sandwich through my nose.

I have to say that a few of the sessions I attended could easily vie for this title. Nothing like getting a bunch of passionate eventers in small rooms and talking about passionate topics. Totally took my mind off of the fact that I hadn't even begun to do a thing about Christmas and the holiday season.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They say cats have nine lives. They would settle for one good one. Adopt a cat (or dog) today.

Robby Johnson
Dec. 16, 2003, 12:14 PM
Flutie for President!!!!

I'm so sorry I missed seeing canterlope decked to the 9's.

We left the raffle (did you like my Round 3 va-va-voom girl presentation of the $5K gc to Bit of Britain? I heard you hooping for me! LOL!) and had dinner at a neat Asian place called Typhoon. It was so cold walking back!! But we did sneak in for 1/2 of Jimmy and all of Torrance. So neat.

I loves me some canterlope. So much so that whilst spiraling up the aquarium I thought I saw her standing across the penguin pond and screamed and screamed until I got the girls attention. And it wasn't her.

There is, after all, only one canterlope! She's not just your ordinary fruit. And her hubby is a great man, great sense of humor, and has said it's OK for Rhodey and Ti Amo to move to Owl Hollow Farm. Yay me! Yay canterlope!

Robby

So I'm a sistah, buy things with cash
It doesn't mean that all my credit's bad

http://community.webshots.com/user/rbjohnsonii

tle
Dec. 16, 2003, 12:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Janet:
Area II hosted it a few years ago, in Pittsburg.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, Pittsburg is Area VIII.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I agree with this and I think it is a terrific place to take the pulse of what's going on. In fact, I think if you read things pretty carefully, it gives a more accurate picture of how the participants, especially at the lower levels, feel about the issues and incidents that confront our sport as a whole than perhaps some other folks do. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Funny that some people would tend to argue that we AREN'T representative of the membership. I'm SOOOO glad to hear that others at the convention have realized that we really are.

Keep those convention recaps coming people!!! Love to hear what I missed.

************
If Dressage is a Symphony... Eventing is Rock & Roll!!!

"All's well that ends with cute E.R. doctors, I always say." -- Buffy

Dezi
Dec. 16, 2003, 12:52 PM
Actually Pittsburg is in Texas - Area V, Pittsburgh is in Pennsylvania - Area VIII

So sayeth the Steeler fan and native of the PA version!!!

Janet
Dec. 16, 2003, 01:17 PM
OK OK My memory sucks, I can't rememper the Areas, and I can't spell.

Sorry

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

canterlope
Dec. 17, 2003, 04:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pgm:
Canterlope:

Reston?!!! You've got to be kidding me! What was it, the Stepford convention? Geez. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

pgm, you are the only person other than myself whom I've ever seen use the word "Stepford" in this oh, so appropriate manner. Most people look at me like I have two heads when I make reference to the book. Are you sure we aren't twins who were separated at birth?

It's a shame that so many people missed the Board of Governors Meeting on Sunday because there was a lot of good information to be had, especially in terms of future Annual Meetings. Several of the concerns that have been raised on this thread were addressed by Jan Zwak who I have been told by several people is now the National Annual Meeting Coordinator.

The length of the Hall of Fame was at the top of the list. The speakers had been asked to keep their comments to five minutes or less and when they didn't, it was difficult to find an appropriate and gentle way to get them to conclude their remarks. I almost suggested a trap door underneath the podium that was set to open on a five minute timer, but thought better of it. Suffice it to say, the powers-that-be know that this was a problem and it is an issue that will be addressed in the future.

Overlapping sessions was also an issue that was brought up and expanding the Convention to five days was discussed. Unfortunately, this would increase costs and time away from other duties for both the USEA and the individuals who would have to attend the Wednesday meetings, but we have definitely outgrown a meeting over four days. Over the next year, the cost-benefit of going to a five day meeting will be explored.

The possibility of bringing back the Event College was discussed as well (Robby, this would probably address your "cluster track" type of format suggestion). It was sort of offered in Portland, but the last time it really was in full swing was Dallas. Personally, I think it went a long way in helping the different groups in our association figure out what sessions were important to attend and I really hope they do decide to reinstitute the program.

One small complaint that I have with both this meeting in Boston and the one in Cleveland has to do with the lack of information given to the attendees. The three-ring binders that were last given in Portland were packed full of things like a map of the meeting rooms, a chart of all the different sessions, extensive information about our sponsors, bios of our Board of Governors, the final year end point standings, information about the host city, items being offered in the raffle, and so on. In Boston and Cleveland, the little brochures we received didn't have nearly enough information in them. One glaring ommission this year in my mind was the absence of a meeting evaluation form.

If the demise of the three ring binders had to do with the expense of putting them together, I would be more than willing to pay an extra five dollars to see them return. If it had to do with a lack of time or manpower, I would be more than willing to volunteer to copy, collate, insert, whatever. Just please give me a map of the convention center so I don't wander around trying to find a meeting to which I am already ten minutes late and a hand-out of the final leader board so all of the riders get the recognition they deserve, not just the ones who finished at the top.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They say cats have nine lives. They would settle for one good one. Adopt a cat (or dog) today.

Badger
Dec. 17, 2003, 05:03 AM
The Amateur proposal got lively discuss here on the COTH BB. How did it play at the convention?

pgm
Dec. 17, 2003, 07:08 AM
Badger:

There is some confusion on what happened to the proposal. The amateur status committee made their recommendations to the Executive Committee on October 6, 2003. The executive committee authorized the committee to make a rule change proposal along those lines. The purpose of the open forum was to answer concerns and questions and to discuss implementation of the rule. This forum was cancelled and a discussion was then sent to the Friday Board of Governor's meeting. In the end, a three part motion was made by Howard Simpson to 1- accept the proposal as written, 2- authorize the president to negotiate for a $0 cost amateur certification for N and T comeptitors, and 3- empanel a task force to look at the amateur rule 808 and suggest further changes that might be needed. This was a suggestion originally made by David O'Connor and was unanimously approved by voice vote of the Board.

However...

King Penniman believes that all the board did was table the proposal for further discussion. I understand that there are some folks in Area I that are going to redo the proposal. No one on the committee has been asked to do anything further on behalf of the USEA with regard to this issue.

flutie
Dec. 17, 2003, 07:45 AM
pgm - I wouldn't be at all surprised if this is just the first of many "Data Interpretations as Writ by King Penniman." It's going to be an interesting year!

Flutie

Heather
Dec. 17, 2003, 07:53 AM
If I can add one thing--item three of the reccomendation suggested, in additon to what pgm wrote, that we look into writing an "exception" for the sport of eventing for 808. The jumpers have one now relating to, I believe, not having done a Grand Prix within 30 days. The idea would be to see if one could be written for eventing creating restrictions for certain divison based on expereince AND amamteur status, or that would at least more fully encompass the the eventer's definition of amamteur as not done by 808.

Badger
Dec. 17, 2003, 07:56 AM
Well that's an unexpected twist! Doesn't the Board of Governor's meeting conduct it's business under Robert's Rules of Order? And isn't there a secretary taking minutes and distributing them to the members of the board? I'm asking, because it sounds like there was be a motion made and it was passed. If it was formally moved and accepted, is there a lot of room for interpretation?

pgm
Dec. 17, 2003, 08:09 AM
Heather:

What you suggest has always been contemplated as a necessary change. The proposal that was accepted by the Board and which King Penniman now seems to think has not been adopted actually spells out some very specific restrictions. As such we always anticiapted a change to Rule 808 that said something like "for participation in Amateur sections of eventing, see article ...." and then the restrictions that we proposed to appendix 3 would be put in place. These restrictions start with amateur status then restrict each level based on experience so what you are suggesting heather has already been adopted.

However, what David was responding to was the objection to the definition of who is and who is not an amateur. If our reality is as different from the Hunter jumper and Dressage world as people seem to think, then some changes could then be made to improve the rule.

As for Robert's Rules, I doubt if there are many committee members who see this the same way that King does. But when he stated this opinion about what they had done, they simply sat on their hands. So, the effect is that a year's worth of committee work is wasted.

[This message was edited by pgm on Dec. 17, 2003 at 11:24 AM.]

Hannahsmom
Dec. 17, 2003, 08:22 AM
As an interested member, are there minutes taken at all the meetings and where would I go to request a copy of them? I would like to get up to speed with the official record of some of these decisions. I apologize in advance if it is obvious where to find this.

canterlope
Dec. 17, 2003, 08:51 AM
Minutes are taken at every board meeting, both in written form and through the use of a tape recorder. And, if my memory serves me correctly, because the USEA is a 501(c)3, those minutes must be made available to the members of the association. To find out for sure, contact Jo Whitehouse or Sharon Gallagher at the National Headquarters.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They say cats have nine lives. They would settle for one good one. Adopt a cat (or dog) today.

Hannahsmom
Dec. 17, 2003, 08:55 AM
Thanks for the info!

Heather
Dec. 17, 2003, 09:51 AM
I know pgm, it wasn't a criticism, but just wanted to elaborate point three for those who weren't there, because it's an important one for those like me that have some serious reservations about the amateur issue. Just wanted to make sure peopel knew those issues were still being discussed -- in theory anyway (can't comment about the after-the-facct stuff--I was attempting to slog home through the weather).

pgm
Dec. 17, 2003, 11:28 AM
Heather:

John and Ellen William and I left on a 5:00 plane out of Logan- it was a blizzard. Very intersting - the runway was totally covered with snow - a giant jet propelled sled - now I know how Santa Clausefeels when he leaves the north pole. Actually it was a very soft take off I must say.

Janet
Dec. 17, 2003, 11:49 AM
The rules about who is eleigible for particular "amateur" classes/divisions can be in the division rules, rather than in 808, 809, 810. For instance, the "Adult Amateur Hunter" and "Adult Amateur Jumper" divisions have additional restrictions on not riding any horse in a class over fences bigger than X. Those rules are not in 808-810 (in fact, they may be zone rules, and not in the rulebook at all).

The "Amateur Owner Hunter" divisions have additional restrictions on not being allowed to ride any horse you don't own in any class in the show. Again, this appears in the Hunter rules, not the general rules.

So it should be perfectly acceptable to put the proposed additional restriction (the same horse/rider pair not to have competed 2 levels up within X years) in the Eventing rules rather than the General Rules.

Making it LESS restrictive (e.g. allowing in some of those who are defined as not-amateur by 808.1.c or 808.1.f) would be a bit trickier. I am not sure you would want to, becuase c and f are there to prevent particular abuses.

But you could still define a division (in the evening rules) as (for instance) "Modified Amateur Novice, open to all amateurs regardless of previous experience, and all riders (whether amateur or not) who have never competed at Prelim or above." That would not require any changes to the 808-810 rules.

I don't think it is reasonable to try to change the 808-810 rules specifically to suit eventing, because you would be changing it for all divisions, and would have to fight the h/j politics as well as the eventing politics. But if you define a special division in the eventing rules, you only have to deal with the eventing politics.

Not that I am endorsing any of this, you understand.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

Janet
Dec. 17, 2003, 11:57 AM
Even though I don't want to see amateur divisions encouraged in eventing, I am very disappointed that the BoG is not doing what it voted to do. Particularly the motion to find out what the USEF would say about enforcement of amateur rules for non-members of USEF.

VERY disappointed.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

Janet
Dec. 17, 2003, 11:58 AM
We flew out of Boston about 3:10 (on a flight scheduled for 2:15) from a dry runway, and landed at Dulles about 5 to ordinary rain. I guess we flew over all the snow.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

Heather
Dec. 17, 2003, 12:10 PM
We left on the train around 9:00 and it took us 16hours. Both because of the weather, and because so many people were getting booted from planes they were all trying to get on the train. At one point, no joke, not only was every seat taken, but the aisles of every car were lined wiith people and their luggage.

Janet, it maybe rule books semantics, but there is a way to give specific divisions excemptions or alteration to 808--the jumpers have one. I think some research would help define which way (the exemption or your diea) would best serve eventers.

pgm
Dec. 17, 2003, 12:19 PM
Janet:

One thing I do worry about is that restricting division based on skill and experience may in fact compromise the safety of our sport. If one can win with a substandard performance in a modified amateur class, then there will be little peer pressure for riders to get better. The effect of competition is to raise all standards. Having experienced amateurs compete with less experienced amateurs will ensure that the quality required to win is not diluted.

tle
Dec. 17, 2003, 12:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Having experienced amateurs compete with less experienced amateurs will ensure that the quality required to win is not diluted.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm very interested in how this would WORK with amateurs, but is NOT working now (when Ammys and pros compete against one another). Seriously, I'm not following your logic. If your comment is to say that you wouldn't want experienced people separated out from inexperienced because it will raise the bar, then why would we want to separate Ammys from Pros since essentially it equates to the same argument when we're talking about experience.

************
If Dressage is a Symphony... Eventing is Rock & Roll!!!

"All's well that ends with cute E.R. doctors, I always say." -- Buffy

Janet
Dec. 17, 2003, 12:34 PM
pgm,

I wasn't endorsing that in particular. Just illustrating how to separate "definition of an amateur" in 808-810 from "definition of a division" in the eventing rules (17xx).

But to address your point, I don't buy it. In the first place, my "modified amateur" example allows IN people excluded by your amateur proposal. It allows experienced amateurs, in-experienced amateurs, and in-experienced non-amateurs. This makes it at least as competitive as "experinced amateurs and in-experinced amateurs". By your argument, it would be safer.

But I don't buy your premise either. I don't know anyone who moved up because they were winning regularly at the current level.

I do know people who are winning regularly at the current level, but don't move up because "the next level looks scary".

I also know people who DO move up to the next level without ever winning a ribbon at the current level because "the current level is getting boring, and the next level looks easy".

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

Janet
Dec. 17, 2003, 12:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Heather:

Janet, it maybe rule books semantics, but there is a way to give specific divisions excemptions or alteration to 808--the jumpers have one. I think some research would help define which way (the exemption or your diea) would best serve eventers.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
It is easy to put ADDITIONAL restrictions on Amateur divisions in a eventing. Just define the division in the eventing rules, and then get a pointer in 808 that says "But see 17XX for eventing".

The current (committee) proposal would keep out a horse/rider pair that had compelted 2 levels up. That would be easy to add in the eventing rules, and have a pointer in 808.

It is a little more difficult if you want to be more inclusive- which is the sense I got from the meeting. How do you define the line between "someone who teaches up-down lessons once a week" and a "full time professiona instructor"? Each end is pretty clear, but drawing a clear line between them is pretty hard.

If you COULD clearly define who you wanted to include, then, again, you could do it within the eventing rules- "Division X is open to amateurs as defined in 808 to 810, and to those who meet conditions a, b, and c below
a...
b...
c..."

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

pgm
Dec. 17, 2003, 01:02 PM
Janet/tle:

What is the purpose of classifying riders by experience?

pgm
Dec. 17, 2003, 01:13 PM
tle;

And to answer your specific question two reason:

1. We would want to create amateur sections not because amateurs as a rule ride any less well than professionals (which they do not, by the way) but because they share one vivid love for our sport while operating in another industry for money and their livelihood. This is a very hard way to enjoy our sport and I commend anyone who does this. It is only fair that since we already recognize their sacrifice and contribution to offer them special recognition through amateur classes.

2. And we should offer amateur classes because they have asked us to create the divisions through the adult rider coordinators and their area representatives. The USEA generally tries to respond positively to these requests.

tle
Dec. 17, 2003, 01:28 PM
pgm,

I understand point #1, but wonder why specific classes are necessary instead of just recognizing for recognition sake. I am one of those amateurs but don't really see how my "vivid love of the sport" is any different than my best friend who is a pro, nor how that love translates into recognition ONLY THRU separate divisions and not via recognition thru the system we have in place now. (and how that and ONLY THAT will equate to what you stated above - that it will make the competition better). But of course I'm one of "they" but have never asked for separate ammy classes.

But you knew this because we've been over and over andover this. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

************
If Dressage is a Symphony... Eventing is Rock & Roll!!!

"All's well that ends with cute E.R. doctors, I always say." -- Buffy

pgm
Dec. 17, 2003, 02:01 PM
tle:

Yes I did know that. Can you answer the previous question? I would appreciate it.

pgm
Dec. 17, 2003, 02:05 PM
ANd the point is not the love for the sport that is any different, but the fact that amateurs don't derive income from the sport and usually means that they don't get to participate in horses on a 24/7 basis. They are spending their earned income on our sport, not earning the income from it. This is what sets them apart and makes them special.

CWO
Dec. 17, 2003, 02:55 PM
But what about the ammys who's spouse earns tons of money with a great job outside horses and the rider can ride great horses all day and afford lots of training for horse and rider?

If we want to differentiate those who have to divide their time between work (other than in the horse world), commuting time to and from the barn, work and home, family and household chores etc., then lets say that. Amateur vs. professional doesn't necessarily accomplish this goal in a lot of situatioins!!

And I am not interested in the separate ammy divisions, either.

Hope that all made sense. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

canterlope
Dec. 17, 2003, 02:57 PM
Below I have pasted the first sentence of the section of the rule book that defines who is an amateur. In bold is a part of this rule that I think we have overlooked a bit in our discussions of whether or not this rule should apply to eventing.<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Article 808. Amateur Status.
1. Regardless of one’s equestrian skills and/or accomplishments, a person is an amateur for all competitions conducted under Federation rules who after his/her 18th birthday, as
defined in Art. 107, has not engaged in any of the following activities which would make
him/her a professional (for professionals wishing to be re-classified as amateurs, see Art. 810.2.1): <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>As an affiliate of the USEF, the USEA is already required to use this method of defining who is an amateur for our recognized events. Is this currently what is happening at the events that offer Amateur divisions? In some cases yes and in some cases no. But the fact of the matter is, we are already supposed to be following this rule. So, in my mind, the current debate over amateur status with regards to our competitors should not be about Articles 808, 809, and 810, but rather what do we need to do to provide for acceptable exceptions within Chapter 17.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They say cats have nine lives. They would settle for one good one. Adopt a cat (or dog) today.

barbaraG
Dec. 17, 2003, 04:50 PM
http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

oh, Gosh, Canterlope,

I loved seeing you and Everyone at the Meeting, my First National. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

But this Whole question is beginning to make my poor little head hurt! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

I help sponsor an Adult Competition, I've drawn the qualifications as well as I can, with the help of a T.D., to give Adult Riders, on their own horses, a fair chance to Compete against their age and experience peers!

We do this in the Novice and Training Divisions, with an age restriction of 30 years plus and one restriction for experience. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

I barely had enough entries last year, to give out 16 beautiful ribbons to 8 th. place!

Other Events do Something similar...with an extra ribbon, or trophy, for those who qualify.

Sometimes, I think people don't want to ride, let alone Compete, they want to sit and Whine! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

If we want Organizers to create these Adult Divisions, as the rules allow, we have to
support them! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif I know lots of them, not one makes money! They are grateful to break even! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

It's the same with all this noise about the "Ratings System" for Events!

How do we do that objectively? Who would do that and How would it be funded!!??

Especially when you realize that Most riders Don't use the Event Evaluation Forms we already have!!

Please excuse the rant. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif I'm tried and depressed. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

BarbaraG
GWV/ http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

tle
Dec. 18, 2003, 05:57 AM
Actually, canterlope, that was one of my original arguments with pgm... that the definition is already there and we fall under those rules (since he was saying that the needed to "determine" an appropriate definition across teh board). http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

************
If Dressage is a Symphony... Eventing is Rock & Roll!!!

"All's well that ends with cute E.R. doctors, I always say." -- Buffy

pgm
Dec. 18, 2003, 07:15 AM
Janet and Tle:

I'm still waiting for the answer to my question. I know what I believe is the purpose behind amateur classes, but I do not understand the purpose behind experienced based classes. Please explain it to me.

Janet
Dec. 18, 2003, 07:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by canterlope:
Below I have pasted the first sentence of the section of the rule book that defines who is an amateur. In bold is a part of this rule that I think we have overlooked a bit in our discussions of whether or not this rule should apply to eventing.<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Article 808. Amateur Status.
1. Regardless of one’s equestrian skills and/or accomplishments, a person is an amateur _for all competitions conducted under Federation rules_ who after his/her 18th birthday, as
defined in Art. 107, has not engaged in any of the following activities which would make
him/her a professional (for professionals wishing to be re-classified as amateurs, see Art. 810.2.1): <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>As an affiliate of the USEF, the USEA is already required to use this method of defining who is an amateur for our recognized events. Is this currently what is happening at the events that offer Amateur divisions? In some cases yes and in some cases no. But the fact of the matter is, we are already supposed to be following this rule. So, in my mind, the current debate over amateur status with regards to our competitors should not be about Articles 808, 809, and 810, but rather what do we need to do to provide for acceptable exceptions within Chapter 17.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I completely agree with this. We (eventing) should not be trying to change 808. (I personally have a rule change proposal for 808, but it addressed the overall definition of amateur, and has nothing to do with eventing per se).

But we need to really understand in detail what 808 says, in order to determine what we want to put in seventeen.

Also, the rule book says you have to have a USEF amateur card to ride in an amateur class. If we mke exceptions to that (e.g.,signed statement on the USEA membership form) it is not clear to me whether it goes in Chapter 8 or Chapter 17.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

tle
Dec. 18, 2003, 07:34 AM
IMHO

I believe the purpose to division separations based on experience would be to "level the playing field." Now before you go shoving my previous argument back at me saying that this doesn't "help" the sport either, let me say this. I believe it "helps" the sport in the manner described MORE than separation based on an arbitrary reason like how I earn my living.

Again, I have no problem whatsoever with recognizing amateurs. I personally think very highly of this goal! However, nothing in what has been presented seems to me to be in the best interest of the sport and/or riders. Making it optional doesn't work, making it mandatory doesn't work. We've seen soem of the issues that hunters have with this arbitrary division and definitely don't want to make the same mistakes in our sport. And IMHO, the amateur split does not "help" the sport in the manner you've described more than what we already have, in which the question becomes why "fix" something if the fix isn't going to work (Haven't we done that enough times with our ever changing rulebook to know better by now?)

So... I now await your argument since I'm not so naive as to believe that you asked the question simply to get an response. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

************
If Dressage is a Symphony... Eventing is Rock & Roll!!!

"All's well that ends with cute E.R. doctors, I always say." -- Buffy

Janet
Dec. 18, 2003, 07:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pgm:
Janet/tle:

What is the purpose of classifying riders by experience?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

At a philosophocal level, the same as classifying riders by whether or not they satisfy 808. To create a "fair" way of splitting up divisions

Note that if the definition of 808 DID separate out those who "share one vivid love for our sport while operating in another industry for money and their livelihood" from those who "earn their livelihood from teaching, training or riding", I would be much more in favor of it. My objection is not to the priniciple, but the the execution.

The 808 definition of amateur includes some who do NOT "operate in another industry for money and their livelihood" (not just the independently wealthy and those supported by family members, but those who make their livelihood IN THE HORSE INDUSTRY by buying and selling horses).

Conversely, the 808 definition of non-amateur includes MANY who "share one vivid love for our sport while operating in another industry for money and their livelihood". Not just the people who teach one up-down lesson a week, but those who muck stalls to pay for lessons (on horses belonging to the barn manager).

It isn't that I necessarily think that separating by recent experience is inherently better than separating by "amateur vs. non amateur". But it is no worse, and it is SO MUCH CLEANER.

If you split by experience, the criteria are given in one or two sentences (as opposed to 3 separate rules).

The definition of experience is CLEAR. Either you did compete/complete an event at a particular level or you didn't. No hairsplitting over "was it really a Prelim event".

It is very easy for the USEA or the organizer to check whether or not a given rider is or is not really eligible. Just check the data kept by the USEA. You don't need another rider to protest them to determine if they are eligible.

Convesely, if you split by amateur/ non-amateur, the definition takes several pages, the definition is highly open to interpretation, it is nearly impossible for the organizer to check whether a rider is really eleigible (easy to check if they have an amateur card, but not easy to determine if they are ENTITLED to the amateur card). It requires a protest by another rider, and a formal hearing to determine if the rider is really ana amateur.

So that is my primary reason for preferring experience over amateur/non-amateur. It is cleaner, clearer, and easier to enforce.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

Janet
Dec. 18, 2003, 08:03 AM
Another secondary reason for preferring "experience" vs "source of income".

One objective that has been stated many times is to encourage newcomers to the sport. It is my personal opinion that a BN division in which no one has recently competed above Novice (but they may be a non-amateur by 808) is MUCH more inviting to the newcomer than a BN division in which no one is a non-amateur (but they may have competed at the upper levels recently on another horse).

But it is a long time since I was a "newcomer to the sport", so I may be wrong.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

Janet
Dec. 18, 2003, 08:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pgm:
1. We would want to create amateur sections not because amateurs as a rule ride any less well than professionals (which they do not, by the way) but because they share one vivid love for our sport while operating in another industry for money and their livelihood. This is a very hard way to enjoy our sport and I commend anyone who does this. It is only fair that since we already recognize their sacrifice and contribution to offer them special recognition through amateur classes. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I am not sure I buy this. The sacrifices I make (working full time as the primary wage earner for my household, and therefore riding in the dark, etc.) are DIFFERENT from the sacrifices Gillian makes being a professional, but I don't necesssarily think my sacrifices are GREATER. (But don't tell her that.)

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

pgm
Dec. 18, 2003, 02:50 PM
Janet:

The "fairest" way to divide classes is randomly. Why do we divide classes at all?

tle:
Where is the field not level? We all do the same dressage test, we all jump the same jumps, the standards of performance are the same for all entries so where are the inequities?

bip
Dec. 18, 2003, 05:15 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cwo:
But what about the ammys who's spouse earns tons of money with a great job outside horses and the rider can ride great horses all day and afford lots of training for horse and rider?

QUOTE]

More importantly, how should I go about becoming one of these people? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

canterlope
Dec. 19, 2003, 05:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cwo:
But what about the ammys who's spouse earns tons of money with a great job outside horses and the rider can ride great horses all day and afford lots of training for horse and rider?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>What about these riders? Are you saying that because they happen to be in a situation that allows them greater latitude with regards to their equine endeavors that they should not be allowed to compete against their fellow amateurs? Or that the amateur division should be based soley on income, regardless of the source, and that only those below a certain income level should be allowed to carry the coveted title of amateur? If so, then a logical conclusion that can be drawn from this is that amateur divisions should basically be welfare divisions open only to the financially disadvantaged and riders whose spouses can afford to support them and their equestrian pursuits need not apply.

But, why stop at just those riders with rich spouses? What about riders who are not married, but who have rich sugar daddies or mommies who support them? Or riders who have wealthy parents that support them? Or riders who inherit a heap of money from their rich Aunt Ester when she dies and become independently wealthy in their own right as a result? Is this really the group of people we are trying to protect the average amateur from in order to give them a better chance at some sort of recognition through their placings at events and on year end leader boards?

I just don't think so. And, because I am the poster child for this group, well, except for the fact that my husband is a professional horseman and earns his tons of money both in and out of the horse world, I can honestly say that your level of income has nothing to do with your success as a rider. Yes, I can not deny that money does make it easier to buy the horse of your dreams, take lessons from top riders, or afford to compete in more events than someone with limited funds. But, if a rider's financial situation is the major influencing factor to their success, then I would be at the top of the leader boards every year. Since this ain't happening, there must be some other magical ingredient that allows riders to be successful.

Plus, if you talk to the professionals out there, you will find that, in most cases, their level of income is equal to or less than that of your average amateur. Everybody knows that there isn't a lot of money to be had in the eventing world and very few people are out there getting rich through their involvement with our sport. So, if we use income level as the way to determine amateur status, many of the riders we currently look upon as professionals will be the first ones that will be included in the amateur division. Not only would this result in a system that would work against the reasons why we wish to create the amateur divisions, but it would mean our divisions would be based soley on who has it and who doesn't. If you think we are seen as elitists by people outside of the equestrian world now, just think of what their perceptions would be if we started dividing our divisions by have and have-nots.

Then there would be the issue of determining just how much money a person would have to make in order to be classified as amateur or professional and how would such a system be regulated. What would riders be required to submit as proof of income? Bank statements, tax returns, pay stubs? Would they be judged on gross income, adjusted gross income, taxable income? What about those riders with off-shore accounts who could very easily shield their actual incomes from inquiring minds? My god, the can of worms that such a system would create knows no bounds and regulating it would be an absolute nightmare.

All of this is a very long-winded way of saying that, if we always look to the exceptions instead of the average person we are trying to create a rule for, we will never come to any agreement on what that rule should be. It is impossible to create a system that will treat every single person fairly.

So, we can either throw our hands up in the air and say it can't be done or create a system that will be as fair as possible to the largest majority of those involved with the caveat that that system must be enforceable in a reasonable manner. Right now, the USEF has such a system. It works for the majority of its members and it has been proven that it can be enforced. Is it perfect? No. But why would we want to reinvent a wheel that has already been created when we can accept that wheel as the basis for our system and then work to find ways to adapt it so it works for our riders?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They say cats have nine lives. They would settle for one good one. Adopt a cat (or dog) today.

LisaB
Dec. 19, 2003, 05:28 AM
Well said, Canterlope.
But given the FACT that we are in the hands of what-evah fate at each event, the amount of money spent on horse, etc. has NO bearing on the outcome of the division. This sport in inheritantly objective. Don't you think if the pros could sell their uber-advanced packer for $200k to some rich schmuck(you're not a schmuck Canterlope, just making a point), so rich schmuck could win time and again and make them happy, that would have gotten on the bandwagon and done it years ago? Huh? We still have to be able to ride, and ride well to win. Money CAN'T play a factor in any rulings in our sport.
I don't make a lot of money, my hubby is a cop, I take my lessons and lumps just like everyone else. Some days, I do well and beat the rich folks and the pros. Other days, I don't.
I still want Canterlope's tack box though http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif
That's a ridiculous assumption. And actually, I think the whole ammy-pro thing is ridiculous becuase like I said, I CAN beat a pro on a given day(if they fall off) and I WANT to strive for that.

mellsmom
Dec. 19, 2003, 05:40 AM
LisaB- Next time I see a pro falling off I'm going to be watching you really closely to see if you caused it :-)

PGM, for folks in favor of the ammy distinction being available for those who choose to participate in those divisions (whew).. what is the next step for us? Do we need to write letters, sedn e-mail to express our displeasure at the seeming negation of the BOG decision?

"I've got a holiday, a paid holiday, I've got a holiday in my head"

Don't like my riding? Call 1-800- phh- fftt

canterlope
Dec. 19, 2003, 05:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Don't you think if the pros could sell their uber-advanced packer for $200k to some rich schmuck... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hey, that's Mrs. Rich Schmuck to you. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They say cats have nine lives. They would settle for one good one. Adopt a cat (or dog) today.

LisaB
Dec. 19, 2003, 06:29 AM
Hey, Mrs. Rich Schmuck! You do your duty in keeping the family fortune too!
I've jsut seen many people buying ex-advanced horse and failing miserably at events because they thought they could buy their way in. I'm tootling around on my TB and here they are fighting to the death over a coop. Doesn't work. Yeah!
And a little roofie in a coke and given to a pro never hurt anyone http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif

Janet
Dec. 19, 2003, 08:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pgm:
Janet:

The "fairest" way to divide classes is randomly. Why do we divide classes at all?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That would be fine with me.

We divide divisions for two reasons.

Logistics- everyone in the same division has to ride under the same judge. This works when a whole day is devoted to dressage, but when you are doing dressage AND CC or SJ on the same day, you need to get all the, say, Novice riders done in time to do their jumping. The easiest way to do this is to split the divisions, and have them do dressage in parallel, some divisions under judge A, and some divisions under judge B.

The second reason that divisions are split is so that more people get "positive feedback", in the form of ribbons, which "makes the customers happy."

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

pgm
Dec. 19, 2003, 10:10 AM
So if we divide randomly then we still have the same problem that generally the professionals are winning all of the upper placings. So how do you solve that problem with experienced based divisions? How do you decide when someone has too much experience? When is there enough time with little experience to say that one's past experiences no longer matter?

Janet
Dec. 19, 2003, 10:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pgm:
So if we divide randomly then we still have the same problem that generally the professionals are winning all of the upper placings. So how do you solve that problem with experienced based divisions? How do you decide when someone has too much experience? When is there enough time with little experience to say that one's past experiences no longer matter?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Who defined that as a problem? As you yourself said, the most common suggestion of "where we should split" is "just above me". So, however you define the split, SOMEONE is going to be "the bottom of the top group" and thus unhappy about the split.

Can you document that "generally the professionals are winning all of the upper placings." Without looking at the data, I am inclined to think that it probably IS true at Prelim and above, but NOT at Training and Novice, and even less at Beginner Novice.

Is the statement
"generally the professional are winning all the upper placings "
More true or less true than
"generally the riders who have competed two levels higher are winning all the upper placings"?

To answer that, you would have to know ALL the people in the division that are, technically, profesionals. Not just the "well known, nationally successful, professionals."

I don't know.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

tle
Dec. 19, 2003, 11:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>So if we divide randomly then we still have the same problem that generally the professionals are winning all of the upper placings.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

why is that true?

************
If Dressage is a Symphony... Eventing is Rock & Roll!!!

"All's well that ends with cute E.R. doctors, I always say." -- Buffy

pgm
Dec. 19, 2003, 11:11 AM
Janet:

Yes I can document that professionals are winning at the lower levels. And yes I can document that professionals with less than two levels of experience above them are also beating similarly situated amateurs. All one has to do is look at the national awards and there is the evidence right there... local professionals are the winners. Indeed, several professionals were removed from the Novice leader board because it was shown that they had gone intermediate in the eighties.

What I hear you saying is that experience is synonymous with skill and that it would be unfair to put one rider with poor skills up against another rider of great skills. Is that right?

Janet
Dec. 19, 2003, 11:22 AM
No, that is not what I am saying.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

gahawkeye
Dec. 19, 2003, 11:39 AM
Haven't read all pages of this thread, but looks alot like the one from a couple weeks ago.

For the Record, I don't like the pro/ammy split. The experienced based split is good, but hard for organizers at upper levels. I rode at Southern Pines a few years back in their Restricted Prelim division -- thought it was great for us "chicken, old farts", http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif but there were only FIVE entries in the division, while they had 3 FULL OP divisions. It was incentive to NEVER ride intermediate, just so I could stay qualified for that division. BUt the competitive spirit reigned and I move up for two intermediate horse trials and am tainted for what?? two - three years! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Not complaining, I know the rules and accept playing within them.

pgm
Dec. 19, 2003, 11:42 AM
Hawkeye, are you an amateur?

Janet, what are you saying, then?

gahawkeye
Dec. 19, 2003, 11:52 AM
PGM -- Absolutely, work the full time consulting job, my horse lives 35 miles away with a fantastic care taker who also rides him every now and then when I can't get there due to work, weather, traffic, life. Lucky if I can ride 4 x per week. Especially now with no daylight. Squeeze in lessons when possible, volunteer if life management skills allow, etc.

Janet
Dec. 19, 2003, 12:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pgm:
Hawkeye, are you an amateur?

Janet, what are you saying, then?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Go back and read my previous posts, here and on the amateur thread.

If you are going to split (other than randomly) I think it is better to make a split that is clear, well defined, easy for the riders to figure out, and easily enforcable.

On those critria, "experience" beats "source of income" 4 to nothing.


I also think that skill is "more closely correllated" (WHICH DOES NOT MEAN SYNONYMOUS) with "experience" than with "doesn't meet the amateur definition in 808". But that is secondary to my first point.


Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

KellyS
Dec. 19, 2003, 12:09 PM
In defense of cwo, I don't think she was saying that we really should divide ammy divisions by income/finances. Instead, she made the great point that the common conception of an amateur - the "work 40+ hours a week full time to support horses/competing," does not represent all amateurs.

Canterlope, the whole financial issue seemed to hit close to home for you. But, we both agree that all the money in the world cannot guarantee anyone the blue ribbon.

And, after the entertaining thread on Michael Korda's book, one can see that even the self-proclaimed upper level, perpetual Novice riders with the fancy horses and grooms still have their spot in the eventing world http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
(If you don't know what I'm talking about, then you have to read the thread! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif)

weezie
Dec. 20, 2003, 05:53 AM
"perpetual Novice riders"

This speaks more to the question of how long should anyone (prof or amateur) be able to compete (winning consistently) at the same level on the same horse? Should the pair be required to move up?

Dale Area 1
Dec. 20, 2003, 06:38 AM
Weezie,
We are not talking about the "Ribbon Dance Queen"? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I myself an a Training Level Dressage and BN, Novice (my goal in life) adult am. Do I win -- Never, but I am happy to get around a course, have a good time and feel that I accomplished something through my training and lessons. Would I love to win and get a ribbon -- ABSOLUTELY, that is the iceing on the cake http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

It does drive me crazy when I see professionals that compete at advance, showing and winning at Novice. Also drives me crazy when I see very wealthy adult am. winning at every event at the novice level for the past 10 years (Ribbon Dance Queen).

Is there an answer to this -- most likely not.

I used to get all upset and crazy about it, but I guess I grew up. I want to enjoy my horse, have fun, test my level of training by showing when I have time. I also enjoy the great people that eventers are, some are my best friends, who are there for you no matter what. That is truly the most important part of the sport for me.

If I was a professional and dependant on making a living in the sport, I might have a different opinion on this.

Gee -- I do anything to get out of packing today. Got to go, another trailer run to the new farm http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

LisaB
Dec. 22, 2003, 04:39 AM
Okay, in defense of those folks who have money burning holes in thier pockets and spend a boatload on a horse and possibly idle enough to take lessons 4x a week. It still doesn't work. They still have to ride and ride well to get through the event. I've gone clean on numerous occassion where someone else with the $80k ex-advanced horse has not because THEY were still green and just trying to get through. I've seen crappy riding from someone who works at Walmart to a trust fund baby. I've also seen excellent riding from both.
It just doesn't matter. That's the beauty of eventing.
I remember in high school, I was eventing my chesnut mare saddlebred(I'm confessing at the moment) and every kid around me was getting some kind of import. I still won, I still beat the crap out of them. I would win the dressage with a 10 point spread because I would get 9's in my riding and my horse was doing her best that she could do. Those other kids were making mistakes, couldn't sit correctly, get thier geometry right, jumping up the neck, etc. It still like that.
It seems the way our divisions are here is that the organizers kind of split the divisions up anyway. I'm in with all the amateurs with like experiences and the other divisions have the pros with their greenies.

colliemom
Dec. 22, 2003, 09:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Rumors are the Mikmar is going to be featured on the cover of an upcoming Beval catalog <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not a rumor. Got mine in the mail last week. I thought the picture on the cover was of a museum piece, an example of bits that used to be used. Wow.

pgm
Dec. 22, 2003, 11:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by weezie:
"perpetual Novice riders"

This speaks more to the question of how long should anyone (prof or amateur) be able to compete (winning consistently) at the same level on the same horse? Should the pair be required to move up?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why on earth would we want to do this? If the person is not comfortable going at higher levels, imposing this kind of standard says "move up or get out."

pgm
Dec. 22, 2003, 11:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Janet:

I also think that skill is "more closely correllated" (WHICH DOES NOT MEAN SYNONYMOUS) with "experience" than with "doesn't meet the amateur definition in 808". But that is secondary to my first point.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmm. So the purpose of the split would be to put those with less experience and "skill" into their own division. And that this criteria would be easy to enforce and clearly defined.

Lets work through this a bit more.

First,is it good policy to dilute the competitive standards for a particular group by placing those with less skill into a division that is reserved for inexperienced riders?

Second, we know that by the current standards, people who are professionals but not currently competing could easily qualify for inclusion into restricted divisions without much effort, (Jimmy Wofford, Myself, Abigail Lufkin and the entire Olympic sdhow Jumping team would all qualify for Novice Rider divisions.) While the standard is clear and enforceable, is this really serving the needs of the group for whom a preference is made? What do Jim Wofford and a true Novice rider have in common?

Janet
Dec. 22, 2003, 11:36 AM
If you can define "a true Novice rider", that would help.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> First,is it good policy to dilute the competitive standards for a particular group by placing those with less skill into a division that is reserved for inexperienced riders? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> To the extent that you are competing against "the test" (same dressage test, same cross country course, same stadium course), it doesn't dilute the standard.
To the extent that you are competing for ribbons, splitting by ANY criteria other than randomly dilutes the competition.

You are the one that appears to see it as a "problem that generally the professionals are winning all of the upper placings." Any approach which "solves" that "problem" will, neccessarily "dilute the competition" from the perspective of ribbons.

You said:
"Second, we know that by the current standards, people who are professionals but not currently competing could easily qualify for inclusion into restricted divisions without much effort, (Jimmy Wofford, Myself, Abigail Lufkin and the entire Olympic sdhow Jumping team would all qualify for Novice Rider divisions.) While the standard is clear and enforceable, is this really serving the needs of the group for whom a preference is made? What do Jim Wofford and a true Novice rider have in common?"

Which part of "(WHICH DOES NOT MEAN SYNONYMOUS)" is it that you don't understand?

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

pgm
Dec. 22, 2003, 11:59 AM
Janet:

Forget it. Its not worth the effort to argue this stupid point any further. I sick and tired of it.

Janet
Dec. 22, 2003, 12:00 PM
Me too.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

poltroon
Dec. 22, 2003, 12:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Canterlope wrote:

So, we can either throw our hands up in the air and say it can't be done or create a system that will be as fair as possible to the largest majority of those involved with the caveat that that system must be enforceable in a reasonable manner. Right now, the USEF has such a system. It works for the majority of its members and it has been proven that it can be enforced. Is it perfect? No. But why would we want to reinvent a wheel that has already been created when we can accept that wheel as the basis for our system and then work to find ways to adapt it so it works for our riders?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Canterlope, I would've written exactly what you wrote, but about the "restricted" style divisions instead. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

canterlope
Dec. 22, 2003, 02:49 PM
poltroon, I like the restricted divisions as well, but there are three concerns with them.

First, they aren't well subscribed. There aren't a lot of people who qualify for them because they are so restrictive. Either an inexperienced rider has a horse that is over-experienced or an inexperienced horse has a rider who is over-experienced. Plus, organizers aren't that keen on offering them because they only get a handful of riders who enter them.

Second, they don't encourage riders to attempt the next highest level. This is not to say that we need to adopt an up or out mentality, but we should be encouraging those riders who are qualified to expand their horizons.

And third, with respect to the current discussion, they wouldn't necessarily serve the needs of our adult riders. We've already discovered that the regular divisions we have now force our adults into divisions with the professionals if they complete two horse trials at the next highest level and then move back down. The restricted divisions do this if a rider competes in just one event at the next highest level. For the adult amateur who attempts the next highest level or who brings along another horse and starts at the bottom of the ladder, they can't use the restricted divisions.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They say cats have nine lives. They would settle for one good one. Adopt a cat (or dog) today.

tle
Dec. 23, 2003, 09:28 AM
Ok, here's a question maybe someone can answer. Why do we split the divisions with Jr/YR separate?

************
If Dressage is a Symphony... Eventing is Rock & Roll!!!

"All's well that ends with cute E.R. doctors, I always say." -- Buffy

Janet
Dec. 23, 2003, 10:38 AM
I am done with the amateur question.

I want to know what happened in the ratings session.

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

VetRep
Dec. 28, 2003, 09:11 PM
Just thinking "outside the box" on the amateur question for a moment...

I have not participated in this discussion to date, but I've been observing (sounds better than "lurking") My idea is rough, but I thought I'd throw it out there anyway.

What if we left it up to the riders?

Say there's a points system, from 1 to 10, and when entering an event the rider assigns themself a "worthiness score", 10 being the best. A professional on a green horse or just moving up may give themself a 5, whereas that same professional on a seasoned campaigner may give themself a 9. Professionals would not be allowed to score themseleves lower than, say, a 5. An amateur could score themself anywhere on the scale, depending on how prepared they feel or how experienced they are.

What I think would make this system most interesting is what the organizer does with the information. A heavily subscribed level might warrant three divisions. Division "A" could consist of the 8's-10's, Division "B" could consist of the 4's-7's, and "C" could consist of the 1's-3's. There would certainly be overlapping of the pros and ammys in division "B", perhaps some in "A" (but those ammys have deemed themselves worthy), but there would be no overlap in "C".

An event with fewer entries may warrant only 2 divisions, and could be split down the middle.

Again, I know this is rough. Could it be abused? Sure...but maybe it could be tested at a few pilot events next year. I competed at the upper levels as a young rider, and when I made the transition to the adult divisions I would have LOVED if I could have ranked myself as a 3 for the first few events. By the same token, once I got going I was (usually) up for a challenge, and would have ranked myself as a 7 or an 8 to test myself among the big (but not the biggest) guys. Think about it, the huge events with tons of pro competition (where it seems amateurs get lost the most) would have the most "fair" separation possible.

Any thoughts? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif