[RunForIt]

The incredible fact about writing, is that it "freezes" thinking...CANTERLOPE, your thoughtful argument in your last post was just so dead on the nail - "the point of the exercise is to find or breed horses that are up to the challenge..."; perhaps that also applies to those people who want to participate in the challenge. Thank you for your wisdom and passion.

[denny]

On the Jersey Fresh thread, I posted some speeds and distances from 25-30 years ago. Really study them, because they answer these questions.
What we`ve seen, over the last quarter of a century, is the "shrinking 3-day event"
"LOOK, HONEY, I SHRUNK THE EVENT!!"
We`ve hardly noticed it, because it has been so gradual.When was the last 5 min. steeplechase anyone can remember? Yet they were once normal. Or roads and tracks at 240 meters/minute? Again, once normal. Or a 35-45 minute phase C? And so on.
Diminish something very gradually, and it`s almost imperceptible.
As the 2nd day shrank, the kinds of horses could change, and did. This latest shrinkage, the total abolishment of the 1st 3 phases, is just the final blow.
The people who are so timidly (or, let`s face it, happily) accepting it have had the "stage set " for this development so gradually, that nobody even noticed.
Two days ago I went really hard with my 2 Arabs, with a gps, so I knew the exact distance, and it took me nearly 3 hours to go 20 miles.We did 17,7 miles at Burghley in 1 hour and 30 minutes. Which, looking back, seems incredible, over all those huge fences, so many jumping efforts.You just ask any of these ulr`s to get a horse ready to do that, and see what happens. Except for Jimmy Wofford and a handful of other old codgers, it`s a lost art.
No wonder they don`t want to do it. It`s a bit like asking a bunch of teenagers not to watch videos, or use computers. The point is, we all get used to whatever happens to be the present reality, and can`t truly comprehend anything very different.
We are all whimpier than our grandparents. Sorry, but we are. It`s the age we live in, not an intrinsic fault within us. These current ulr`s ARE whimpier than Bruce Davidson, Mike Plumb, those guys, but if they had lived back under the same challenges, some of them--certainly Philip, for one--would have excelled in that era as well.

[Fence2Fence]

The thing is... not all of us want to be wimps!

[RunForIt]

You're right Denny - the ULRs of today ARE different, but I still do not understand why the sport has to change. As Fence2Fence said "not all of us want to be wimps". That's what I like about long-distance running...everyone doesn't have the physical ability, nor the mental toughness to run and/or race marathons - its long and it hurts (in fact, all races, no matter the distance, hurt if you're racing). But the distance is going to STAY 26.2 miles for the marathon, even if some really talented, very, very fast 10k runners can't run but 18 miles at an elite time for the marathon distance. Those folks can just run shorter races, and be absolutely wonderful doing so. My body happened to have the makeup to run fairly "fast" for long periods of time - I HATED running 5Ks and 10Ks - all out from the time the gun went off. The reasoning for all this change escapes me.

[cinnabar]

Horse and Hound is reporting that new research shows no "welfare" benefits for the short vs. long formats at the ** level.

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/compe...391/60625.html

We have a good first step. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_c...icon_smile.gif

[The natural]

I have found it impossible to follow all the different threads on this topic, so forgive me if I repeat something already pointed out (highly likely, I suppose). But it seems to me the problem with R&T is that for practical purposes it doesn't enter into the scoring--it's just supposed to make the XC harder. And even though you can't really change your placing, you can still lose your horse to injury. No wonder it's vulnerable. To have any reason to exist at all, it should make the XC riskier by tiring the horses. If it doesn't do that, why have it? It either should be run so that it can have an effect on the outcome on its own, or it should be admitted that it is a form of handicap that could increase risks during subsequent jumping. It shouldn't do nothing. If it never discriminates between horses, then it should either be made harder or it should be done away with. This is where Denny's arguments come in. One would suppose that the more demanding R&T of days gone by actually amounted to something tangible. At this point, from what some have said, R&T is essentially a warmup for XC. Why is that an argument for leaving it in the competition? Perhaps there is a logic for keeping the longer format at lower levels, where there might be a better chance of R&T being meaningful. At the highest levels, it's possible that in order to make it tough enough to affect the outcome it may increase the rate of XC accidents to unacceptable levels. The demands on the horse need to be kept balanced, and there have been other changes in the sport. Can all of these be revisited? The other approach is to make it mean something on its own. So here's a wild suggestion: put the steeplechase at the end and make it a time trial, like in bike racing. Now there's a reason to get an OTTB! I have no particular position on this matter, as it cannot ever affect me in this life. I just thought this was an angle I hadn't yet seen.

[tle]

R&T is a warmup/recovery for steeplechase, so I'm not sure I follow your logic of it "does nothing". It may not influence the scoring, but it certainly HELPS horses run XC (rather than hurting them). It has been shown that in sports where the athlete is doing XC type work (not LONG distance but not a sprint either), there IS something to the idea of getting the heart rate up and breathing going ahead of time... with ample time to cool down and recover before actually doing the work. Thus warm-up properly, followed by getting the rates up, followed by a good recovery period with a vet check... hmmm... sounds like Phases A, B, C and the vet box to me... all of which are being eliminated.

I guess I just don't follow how you can say it "does nothing." I'm not trying to be pig-headed... I really don't get it.

Oh, and try telling someone who misses a flag on R&T or has a horse wig out at the start line and they can't cross it in time not to be elminated that it does nothing. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_c.../icon_wink.gif

[Oilburner]

Denny is totally correct. Eventing today has become a "washable marker kid's paint by number picture" when just ten years ago it was a "messy oil-based original". What has happened? Has the sport gotten too big? Have people lost sight of what Eventing is? The last time I checked, I thought Eventing was the ULTIMATE TEST of horse and rider. Eventing is cross country. Doing away with the long format has reduced eventing to just dressage on a cross country course. What is next, cross country in a show jumping arena because footing needs to be perfect and we now cannot have any undulating ground because it may cause horses to lose their balance. No, maybe all riders need to wear airbags that deploy when both feet leave the stirrups, we cannot have anyone fall off their horses. People, Eventing is dangerous, riders are going to get hurt, horses are going to get hurt, maybe die. Neutering this once awesome sport is what all the goody, goody, "Alphabet Organizations" have done. I assume they have done this for the public good, we can't have riders or horses dying in the public specticle, blah,blah. I also have have to assume they have done this "like everything else" for the almighty dollar. Bad publicity means Event's lose their sponsors, you get the picture. Obviously this has also had repercussions at the Olympic level, Beijing 2008?, the IOC has been trying to drop Three-Day for awhile, money, money, blah, money. Would Eventing exist if it were not in the Olympics, certainly, but I do understand sponsorship would be more difficult to procure. There are plenty of sports that make it without being in the Olympics. If you as an Eventer want to reclaim the Sport that once was, you need to organize, make noise, be heard, and do something about it. Rant off http://chronicleforums.com/images/cu...ilies/dead.gif

[The natural]

I keep putting R&T when I guess I mean steeplechase, too. Hopefully that doesn't change what I was trying to get at. What I meant pretty specifically was "influence the scoring". I can see that these phases provide a good warm up for XC. But following a particular warm up is not a basis for a competition. It doesn't decide anything. I agree that sometimes spooky horses will not complete it and be eliminated, but I doubt that the overall purpose of R&T is to weed them out. That could be accomplished any number of ways. I really thought it had to do with some aspect of endurance. And if endurance is being tested, it should show up somewhere in the contest. That's also what I meant by doing nothing. If horses get around an XC course just the same whether or not they did R&T and steeplechase, then it didn't do anything, and didn't enter into the competition. Anyway, it's just an attempt to stand some of the opinions on their heads.

[tle]

the steeplechase portion is where the "speed" in the old "Speed and Endurance Day" came from. Obviously if you're in the saddle for 90 minutes, the endurance is built in. Now it's called the less confusing "Cross Country Day" but it still should test speed AND endurance.

And if you don't think being slow on steeplechase (aka failing the speed test) isn't costly... 1 second = 1 point and with events being hotly contested nowadays with the point spread being very small, that 1 second can cost A LOT! Just look at how people oogled the change to 1 point/second in SJ.

[denny]

Ask this simple question. Is three day eventing at the highest levels a skill sport, an endurance sport, or a combination of both?
I think that different eras have had different answers to this question. Certainly, 30-40 years ago, it was both. But remember, it wasn`t until AFTER the 2nd World War that cavalries were disbanded. Jimmy Wofford`s father was a cavalryman. So were most of the coaches and judges when I started eventing in 1962.
The whole MENTALITY back then was more "tough".
Is that the right word? More of a Teddy Roosevelt`s Roughriders kind of sport, not so technical. There was a distinct difference between the personality types who gravitated toward eventing, instead of, say, hunters, dressage or even show jumping. Maybe more like steeplechase jockeys (which many of us did), or rodeo cowboys.
Frankly, more emphasis on athleticism, less on technical expertise. There`s still a lot of that left in modern eventers. Would you take your mother to an event party????
But this is a looong time away from cavalrymen in this sport, and perhaps that`s one big reason why the "marathon" aspects of eventing are being lost, and why so many people, unlike all the petition signers, are letting them get lost.
I`m exceedingly glad to see that so many people are still "cowboys" at heart. Too bad the Europeans control the FEI. Otherwise, we could just shoot them!

[Oilburner]

Sorry to say it but I think the best thing that could happen to the sport of Eventing is to be booted from the Olympic schedule. If this happened the FEI would probably not care how Eventing would govern itself, ie. Eventing decide it's own destiny, Long or Short. The only downside would be Eventers would have a harder time finding owners because without the whole Olympic specticle there would less goods to sell them on. Heck, the Olympics are usually only a watered down *** anyways, even though it is advertised as a ****. Badminton, Burghley, and Rolex will hopefully be there as their "Long" format selves...

[Gry2Yng]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> I`m exceedingly glad to see that so many people are still "cowboys" at heart. Too bad the Europeans control the FEI. Otherwise, we could just shoot them! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perhaps a bit of arsenic in their congnac would be stylish on the continent. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_c.../icon_wink.gif

[Pol]

Denny, thanks, again. This morning you gave me a good chuckle. In answer to your question, yes, I WOULD (and did) take my mother to an event party. She's the one who got me started playing this game, after all.
Gry-arsenic in the noon sherry would be better. That way the mess could be cleaned up by tea time.

[annikak]

would prefer the tough and solid, rather then the technical. And Ralph Hill, The Illinois Cowboy- http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_c...icon_smile.gif loved looking upto him! glad that there are some here, and I love thinking that I might be associated with them.
Its got to be all about the $$- if there is no roads and tracks, thats about 45 min less in the saddle, therefore they can ride one more horse. Anyone think that might be on track?

[LisaB]

Ack! No Oilburner.
I think we need to go the route of the Olympics being a spotlight in eventing. I completely understand why the Olympics needs to be shorter. Ever hear of an event in China? Ummm, no. So give each venue the option. Sydney I'm sure would have kept the long option just because they have everything already.
What I'm pissed about is all these already established 3 days jumping the bandwagon. Now, we have respected ULR's jumping the bandwagon as well.
I gave this example awhile ago.
We have the Tour De France. It's the pinnacle of cycling and tough as nails. We also have it in the Olympics but on a much smaller scale to be inclusive. Lance didn't go to Athens.
We have the Ironman triathlon in Hawaii. Then we have it also in the Olympics but on a smaller scale.
See what I'm getting at? When we have to rely on terrain and also be inclusive, we can't make a Burghley/Badminton/Lexington at each place.
As Sally O'Conner pointed out, it was about the lone Croatian just happy to finish in good form. He was so excited that we were all excited for him. That's what it's about.
Now, on the other hand, I think we need to concentrate on the established events. And pushing the pressure back on the FEI and lowering their power a bit. It's nice that they re-vamped the organization. But now, they need to scale back and let it ride a bit. Typical business stuff here. I'm in the midst of it now. I was the uber-test-witch because these people had no idea how to test. Now, they get it and I'm retracting my cat claws.

[Janet]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> But it seems to me the problem with R&T is that for practical purposes it doesn't enter into the scoring--it's just supposed to make the XC harder. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The first 20 miles of a marathon don't "enter the scoring". But without those first 20 miles, it ISN'T a marathon.

[Gry2Yng]

<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> But it seems to me the problem with R&T is that for practical purposes it doesn't enter into the scoring--it's just supposed to make the XC harder. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The first 20 miles of a marathon don't "enter the scoring". But without those first 20 miles, it ISN'T a marathon. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well said Janet. I am completely stunned at how simple the answer is.

[Pol]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>(by the natural) But it seems to me the problem with R&T is that for practical purposes it doesn't enter into the scoring--it's just supposed to make the XC harder.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The Natural, phases A, B and C are NOT supposed to make the XC *HARDER* http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_c...s/icon_mad.gif Those phases are designed to PREPARE the horses for XC. Haven't you been LISTENING? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_c...n_rolleyes.gif

[RunForIt]

And Janet, having raced several marathons, its amazing how you "accept" those first 20 miles - you're so fit its usually easy until about 18 miles, and then the real test begins...the race is 26.2 miles, every damned step that you take - or else it isn't a marathon.