The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 113
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan. 3, 2011
    Posts
    40

    Default Why olympic horses have to be bought not made.

    What is wrong with the program of our top riders that they have to go out and buy horses at the last minute to make the olympic team. I see on eventing nation yet another beautiful top eventer from Europe has been bought for a US rider. Are we going to have a team made up of riders on horses bought at the last minute. It is sad that our pros don't have the depth in their programs to produce and make their own horses. What is going wrong? I just don't get it. Good thing there are still some owners out there with very deep pockets.



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec. 13, 2010
    Location
    On The Farm In New England
    Posts
    870

    Default

    Looks like the London team is shaping up to be KOC on a new horse, PD on a new horse, BM on Neville if all stays good, and that leaves one spot up in the air. An up 'n comer or BD?!? Looks like more or less the usual team with a couple of fancy new horses. How could anyone break through?



  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct. 4, 2008
    Posts
    1,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leprechaun View Post
    Looks like the London team is shaping up to be KOC on a new horse, PD on a new horse, BM on Neville if all stays good, and that leaves one spot up in the air. An up 'n comer or BD?!? Looks like more or less the usual team with a couple of fancy new horses. How could anyone break through?
    MLM on a bought horse will get the last spot. No one breaks through. The face of eventing has changed. It's just how it's going to be now. Deep pockets, or access to deep pockets will be needed. I am sure there is an upside to this.....right?



  4. #4
    Join Date
    May. 3, 2008
    Posts
    1,085

    Default

    I think you're probably right.
    PD on new horse
    KOC on new horse
    MLM on new horse
    Will on new horse
    Boyd on Neville
    Sinead on Tate

    All of the new horses will do Rolex, clean x-c with a fair bit of time "to save their legs for London" and then I predict some big #'s on xc. At this point, it seems like we should just get ride of x-c entirely and have indoor eventing because no one is paying any attention to what these horses look like on course. It really grates on me that the ability to do a 70+ dressage test has any importance at all in this sport. Once you're in the mid 60's I no longer see any value in rewarding anything higher.



  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec. 13, 2010
    Location
    On The Farm In New England
    Posts
    870

    Default

    Definite possibility for Sinead.
    MLM only on Alt. list unless blows everyone away this spring.
    I'm guessing a no For Will.
    Somehow I think Buck will be in the mix too.
    Love to see Colleen improve her dressage and be a contender.
    We'll see... These things are always interesting.



  6. #6
    Join Date
    May. 23, 2006
    Posts
    5,461

    Default

    This whole discussion is pointless. Let them buy all the horses they want, let them rain down from the sky. It will, as always, boil down to whom ever has a sound horse. Why should anything change next year?



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    18,646

    Default

    It's the FEI dressage coefficient. It can knock a horse from 2nd to 5th or even more, even if the horse goes double clear in XC and SJ. That's not the dressage score itself, but the added penalty points.

    Mark Todd won Badminton this year because of the added penalty points to his competitors from the coefficient. Without it, Sam Griffiths would have won and Todd would have finished, IIRC, 4th.

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRider View Post
    I think you're probably right.
    PD on new horse
    KOC on new horse
    MLM on new horse
    Will on new horse
    Boyd on Neville
    Sinead on Tate

    All of the new horses will do Rolex, clean x-c with a fair bit of time "to save their legs for London" and then I predict some big #'s on xc. At this point, it seems like we should just get ride of x-c entirely and have indoor eventing because no one is paying any attention to what these horses look like on course. It really grates on me that the ability to do a 70+ dressage test has any importance at all in this sport. Once you're in the mid 60's I no longer see any value in rewarding anything higher.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire



  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug. 21, 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,614

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snoopy View Post
    This whole discussion is pointless. Let them buy all the horses they want, let them rain down from the sky. It will, as always, boil down to whom ever has a sound horse. Why should anything change next year?
    Exactly. Last (wo)men standing/sound will be the team.
    I evented just for the Halibut.



  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,147

    Default

    MLM is not a "break through"?
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  10. #10
    Join Date
    May. 3, 2008
    Posts
    1,085

    Default

    I wouldn't call MLM a breakthrough because she threw around tons of cash and glued herself to the O'Connors. Not exactly anything new about that. When I think breakthrough I think years of toiling and bumping up against entrenched interests until the opportunity arises and you get your chance. TPTB opened the doors wide open for MLM and her $$$ sponsors. The wall never existed for her.



  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct. 4, 2008
    Posts
    1,143

    Default

    No MLM is definetly not a breakthrough. She is just an example of how eventing is changing.



  12. #12
    Join Date
    May. 23, 2006
    Posts
    5,461

    Default

    It is an example of the programme in place. It is the programme that has been embraced by everyone involved in creating it. It is the easy route to take....and the most profitable for a few in position now.



  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2000
    Location
    passepartout
    Posts
    10,074

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snoopy View Post
    It is an example of the programme in place. It is the programme that has been embraced by everyone involved in creating it. It is the easy route to take....and the most profitable for a few in position now.
    To add to that:

    1. Results are secondary to maintaining the status quo of the current power structure.

    2. Accountability -- to the US eventing community -- is out the window.

    It is laughable -- or, perhaps, surreal -- that a first-time-listed, inexperienced eventer can go out an purchase a CCI*** horse who has stops on XC and rails+time in SJ, and have it be called a 'major Olympic contender.'



  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct. 4, 2008
    Posts
    1,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JER View Post
    To add to that:

    1. Results are secondary to maintaining the status quo of the current power structure.
    2. Accountability -- to the US eventing community -- is out the window.
    It is laughable -- or, perhaps, surreal -- that a first-time-listed, inexperienced eventer can go out an purchase a CCI*** horse who has stops on XC and rails+time in SJ, and have it be called a 'major Olympic contender.'
    I am thinking the adjective would be inexcusable, and add in ridiculous. But I would use those on all three points mentioned above.

    I think eventing has now surpassed the difficulty of breaking into the upper ranks and making the team for show jumpers. In that arena, results are truly about the best horse that day. Points are easily kept, at the end, it's easy to decipher politics. Eventing, we still have an opinion, of judges, to weigh thru, of behind closed door reviews of who should or should not be on a list. We have TPTB in a position to make money at the expense of what is best for our team. On top of that, jumpers you can make money if you are good enough, there are talent classes, and the list goes on.



  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRider View Post
    I wouldn't call MLM a breakthrough because she threw around tons of cash and glued herself to the O'Connors. Not exactly anything new about that.
    OK, name me another one.

    Money and being with the O'Connors doesn't guarantee even GETTING to the Advanced level.

    MLM is clearly not an instance of "years of toiling and bumping up against entrenched interests".

    But she is equally clearly not part of the group that have dominated the top levels of eventing for many years.
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gold2012 View Post
    No MLM is definetly not a breakthrough. She is just an example of how eventing is changing.
    Isn't that what a "breakthrough" IS?

    An example of how things are changing?
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jul. 2, 2003
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    2,986

    Default

    Also comes down to who can put up with the pressure. We had a halfway decent squad at WEG (save for blowing a spot by not withdrawing Paddy immediately), and the team fell apart at the seams. Same thing happened in HK -- Becky had two stops, Amy fell off, Karen had a stop... it was a disaster. It's not always the horses that are the issue, it's the riders as well...
    -my life-
    Translation
    fri [fri:] fritt fria (adj): Free
    skritt [skrit:] skritten (noun): Walk



  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul. 20, 2006
    Posts
    621

    Default

    From reading these forums it seems there is only one right route to the Olympics: stealing a horse off the meat truck, training it on out-of-season cornfields with no help from mom or dad or any equestrian who has known success, and accepting your pink coat.

    People are indoctrinated by weepy NBC specials highlighting the Cinderella stories of the Olympics. It is patently ridiculous to expect a no-name stranger to make a spot on the US team. We would all howl and wonder if it was just to get that coveted NBC highlight spot.

    Sure, I wish I could watch a US Olympic team staffed with horses and riders whose history I know and appreciate. The last Olympic team actually had that. But guess what! They still sucked.



  19. #19
    Join Date
    Nov. 15, 2006
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky
    Posts
    3,292

    Default

    I guess I don't really get the issue of top riders not 'making' their own horses. I think it's disappointing that a lot of these horses are not Made in the USA, but that's another story.

    I enjoy starting young horses, putting fundamentals on, on the ground and on their back. It's my strong point. A rider at the top of their game only has so much time in the day, and in their career. Why should they not use their abilities where they are used best? All of those horses were indeed, 'made', by someone, maybe more than one someones.

    Don't get me wrong, my favorite stories will always be the long time partnership of horse and rider (ala Sinead, Colleen or someone like them), but I just don't see the 'wrong' of the other way. It's still not a given that any of these new teams will work out, there are just so many variables and too many things that can happen.
    We're spending our money on horses and bourbon. The rest we're just wasting.
    www.dleestudio.com



  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    12,705

    Default

    Honestly...nothing new. And in a lot of ways....I view this as a good thing. It is GREAT that we have so many owners in the USA willing to shell out substantial $$ to get the best horses possible for riders for a chance at riding for the US team.

    This is a GREAT thing for us. It is also good for those who were able to make up and then sell such nice horses for sizable price tags which helps them make a living, continue riding and training etc.

    I guess I view this as a good thing. I think it will be even better assuming the riders get along with their new mounts! But at least with what I've seen of MLM, KOC and PD....I think those guys get along well with a number of different types of horses and are great riders. I don't know Will as well.....but Fernhill horses are often extremely nice.

    The top US riders are also NOT NOT NOT the only ones out there buying for an Olympic shot.....they are just who you are reading about on EN
    ** The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits. -- Albert Einstein **



Similar Threads

  1. buying made horses?
    By Plantagenet in forum Dressage
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: Jun. 22, 2010, 01:49 PM
  2. Sales Tax on horses bought in KY
    By dogdays in forum Racing
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Sep. 17, 2009, 05:56 PM
  3. THE HORSES THAT MADE YOU!
    By 2016 RoyalCrown KTug in forum Eventing
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: Jul. 9, 2008, 08:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •