The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 45
  1. #21
    Join Date
    May. 3, 2008
    Posts
    1,079

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by betonbill View Post
    IMO, dressage and SJ can be improved. What can't be improved so well is not having a CC machine. Would like to see Colleen and Shiraz have a chance too.
    I wasn't expecting to see Colleen on the list with Shiraz. That ship appears to have sailed and I think her goal of doing all of the northern hemosphere four stars is incredibly cool. I was surprised that she wasn't on the national list with the young horse. Again, he's very nice and looks to have much more potential on the flat. I would love to see what she could do with some funding to work on her dressage.

    Agree with the above poster re: MLM. Particularly with two horses. After the rumored shenanigans of last year, she should be in time out, not on the training list.

    also agree in part re: R-Star-it seems like they've really turned it around and are heading in the right direction and I hope the team training doesn't put too much pressure on them. It is an off year though so maybe now is a good time to bring them into the fold with less pressure.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May. 26, 2011
    Posts
    1,111

    Default

    If this is the sum total of all the US riders who are National/Global the then the US has some serious depth issues. Using the qualifications presented for these classifications, how many Brits? Germans? Australians? etc. would you come up with.

    If nothing else the group needs to be enlarged to help develop more talent.
    "I couldn't find my keys, so I put her in the trunk"



  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    12,621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FitToBeTied View Post
    If this is the sum total of all the US riders who are National/Global the then the US has some serious depth issues. Using the qualifications presented for these classifications, how many Brits? Germans? Australians? etc. would you come up with.

    If nothing else the group needs to be enlarged to help develop more talent.
    I think you have to look at the National list together with the Developing Rider list....as I suspect if a rider who would have been on the National list was 25 or under--they got put on the Developing Rider list.

    But I do agree with you...seems like a somewhat short list. I would love to seem more work put on talent spotting and supporting both horses and riders at a lower level. But it all costs $$$.
    ** The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits. -- Albert Einstein **



  4. #24

    Default

    My only comment about Colleen and Luke is that once again, the selectors seem to have forgotten that one must jump all the jumps to be competitive. Why not put them on a list and work to improve her dressage?

    I'm not surprised about Neville. His meltdown at Jersey was scary. Maybe he was brought back so quickly after the fire to fulfill a PR "dream story" that his mind which is quirky at best went totally off th track? Time will tell.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    12,621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flutie1 View Post
    I'm not surprised about Neville. His meltdown at Jersey was scary. Maybe he was brought back so quickly after the fire to fulfill a PR "dream story" that his mind which is quirky at best went totally off th track? Time will tell.
    He did well at Burghley after the fire....Nev has always been on the quirky side of things.
    ** The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits. -- Albert Einstein **



  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2000
    Location
    passepartout
    Posts
    10,038

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flutie1 View Post
    My only comment about Colleen and Luke is that once again, the selectors seem to have forgotten that one must jump all the jumps to be competitive.
    And of course, this sends a very flawed message to aspiring team riders. It encourages a tendency to overlook the XC machine for the horse who scores well in dressage but might not have the heart/mind for top-level XC.

    You can train the former but not the latter.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May. 3, 2008
    Posts
    1,079

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JER View Post
    And of course, this sends a very flawed message to aspiring team riders. It encourages a tendency to overlook the XC machine for the horse who scores well in dressage but might not have the heart/mind for top-level XC.

    You can train the former but not the latter.
    Eventing as a whole these days seems to encourage this sort of thinking. If you can start on a 20, even if you only make it around cross country 1/3 of the time, that's an awful lot of blue ribbons. If you start on a 40, you're never going to win because 1/3 of those dressage horses are going to make it around at every event you go to.

    I've said it a dozen times, there needs to be a point at which scoring better in the dressage doesn't improve your standing going into the other phases. At the four star level, there's no reason to reward going below a 45 in the dressage. I might even argue that that number should be a 48-50. If everyone started cross country based on how far removed from a 45 they were, you'd see a lot more respect paid to performance on xc. I hate seeing a horse score below 50 in dressage and go double clear and lose to a horse with time or rails.
    I don't mean to sound like I hate dressage-I actually love watching UL dressage-what I hate is having the increased need for crazy high dressage scores on a mid-level test kill off what is brilliant and beautiful about eventing and the horses that do it.

    I fear we'll see even more of that because I think the writing is on the wall for the end of stadium after xc at all levels. If you can do the fancy stuff that takes bred-in movement and scope before you run xc, then you can gut the horse on xc and not worry about the next day. I don't care how well your show jumper show jumps, I want to see how he show jumps after running xc. If you want to have a show jumping competition, there are plenty available.



  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    18,521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRider View Post
    Eventing as a whole these days seems to encourage this sort of thinking. If you can start on a 20, even if you only make it around cross country 1/3 of the time, that's an awful lot of blue ribbons. If you start on a 40, you're never going to win because 1/3 of those dressage horses are going to make it around at every event you go to.

    I've said it a dozen times, there needs to be a point at which scoring better in the dressage doesn't improve your standing going into the other phases. At the four star level, there's no reason to reward going below a 45 in the dressage. I might even argue that that number should be a 48-50. If everyone started cross country based on how far removed from a 45 they were, you'd see a lot more respect paid to performance on xc. I hate seeing a horse score below 50 in dressage and go double clear and lose to a horse with time or rails.
    I don't mean to sound like I hate dressage-I actually love watching UL dressage-what I hate is having the increased need for crazy high dressage scores on a mid-level test kill off what is brilliant and beautiful about eventing and the horses that do it.

    I fear we'll see even more of that because I think the writing is on the wall for the end of stadium after xc at all levels. If you can do the fancy stuff that takes bred-in movement and scope before you run xc, then you can gut the horse on xc and not worry about the next day. I don't care how well your show jumper show jumps, I want to see how he show jumps after running xc. If you want to have a show jumping competition, there are plenty available.
    This is the German vision of eventing. And it's so very good for the German horse marketing machine.

    The one thing that would help bring eventing back to a focus on XC would be getting rid of the dressage coefficient. But the FEI eventing committee refused to put that on the table in this round of eventing rules which are in place for another four years. By the time the rules are revisited, eventing worldwide will have swallowed the current system and be ready to accept more changes--shorter XC on the third (or second day). It's death by water torture.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire


    2 members found this post helpful.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Dec. 7, 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    562

    Default

    What people forget about Colleen and Luke is that they're not just ok in dressage, they finish way down in the rankings. And this is after some serious dressage work with Linda Zang. If its true that her young horse is really nice then she could make the list when he moves up the ranks


    5 members found this post helpful.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    12,621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by teddygirl View Post
    What people forget about Colleen and Luke is that they're not just ok in dressage, they finish way down in the rankings. And this is after some serious dressage work with Linda Zang. If its true that her young horse is really nice then she could make the list when he moves up the ranks

    Actually that is not quite true. She has certainly scored and been competitive on the national level. I've watched several of his "bad" tests at the 4* level internationally...and honestly...they are not BAD. And several I thought were scored a tad on the harsh side. It isn't like he is going into the dressage ring and falling apart and he is not a bad mover. She often finish better than most (if not all) the other US Riders at the same competitions.

    I don't know why they are not on the list. They have the potential to be competitive...as competitive as several on that list, if not more so...since his jumping is so consistently good.
    Last edited by bornfreenowexpensive; Dec. 21, 2012 at 10:27 PM.
    ** The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits. -- Albert Einstein **


    3 members found this post helpful.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Jul. 2, 2012
    Posts
    10

    Default

    I would like to remind people that the Spring 2013 training lists come out based mostly on three day form from Fall 2012...It is primarily for this reason that Colleen is left off the list. I watched her test at Pau, which scored a 62.2, and I will yield to bornfreenowexpensive that her 62.2 isn't that bad of a test...other than the flying changes, it was a fairly consistent and quiet test. What left her off the list this time is the 28 time faults XC and 3 rails and 4 time faults in the SJ. This is a total of 44 faults added to her dressage score...That is equivalent to over 2 stops XC. So while there are many people that think "his jumping is so consistently good", based on her most recent three day result, the jumping actually hurt her more than the dressage. For example, say the selectors said "Colleen, if you can get below a 50 on the flat at a 3* or 4*, we will put you on the list." Her Pau result was only 12 points off from that, the equivalent of 3 rails...So if she was consistently finishing double clear xc and sj, it might be worth it to put her on the list, as compared to a pair that could get around a 50 at an international FEI competition (overseas, not the US) but might have 3 rails, or the equivalent of 12 faults (xc time and sj faults combined). But since she had the 62 in the dressage and 44 jumping/time faults, there is no reason for the selectors to consider putting her on the list.

    Does that make sense numerically, regardless of the politics that are always involved in selection? I am very much a "numbers" person, so I just want people to let their emotions be less involved and think with their head logically before they make statements. This is not pointed at anyone directly, just wanted to lay out my sentiments with logic to back it up.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2000
    Location
    passepartout
    Posts
    10,038

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eventer2012 View Post
    I would like to remind people that the Spring 2013 training lists come out based mostly on three day form from Fall 2012...It is primarily for this reason that Colleen is left off the list.... But since she had the 62 in the dressage and 44 jumping/time faults, there is no reason for the selectors to consider putting her on the list.
    What you're saying would make sense if there was any consistency to it with regard to the rest of the list. But is there?

    Will Faudree's most recent result with Andromaque is a E at Burghley. That is their 'three day form' from fall '12. Their spring CCI**** (Rolex) had 20 jump pens on XC. Yet Will and Andromaque are on the World Class list.

    Quote Originally Posted by eventer2012 View Post
    Does that make sense numerically, regardless of the politics that are always involved in selection?
    No -- see above. There's always going to be a subjective element involved in selection. I wouldn't lump all of it together as 'politics'. Selectors have to make subjective decisions and go with their own preferences to some extent. This is a legitimate part of developing a program and a team.

    Quote Originally Posted by eventer2012 View Post
    I am very much a "numbers" person, so I just want people to let their emotions be less involved and think with their head logically before they make statements. This is not pointed at anyone directly, just wanted to lay out my sentiments with logic to back it up.
    The problem here is that people are thinking logically, and some things just don't make sense.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Feb. 27, 2008
    Location
    Middleburg, VA
    Posts
    1,088

    Default

    I agree with several others who agree that Shiraz should not have been on the training lists. Pointing at eventer2012's numbers, his strong suit, which supposedly is jumping, was not as good this year, and the dressage hadn't improved. You can argue that you can improve the dressage report, but Colleen has been working with Linda Zang for several years without a ton of improvement in score. I have no doubt Colleen's flat work has improved by leaps and bounds, but that hasn't reflected in the score. Also, Shiraz will be something like 16 for the next WEG. That also may have played a factor. Her young horse, Covert Rights, look to be quite nice. She very well might have made the lists with him if she hadn't had the stop at Fair Hill. But he's so young, only six turning seven, I think, that she will have plenty of time to bring him along next year.

    Don't get me wrong, I think there are some horses on the list that maybe shouldn't be on the list. Ringwood Magister, IMO does not really want to play at this level, and watching Tiana stuff him around the Olympics was both painful and scary. I don't even think they deserve another chance on the National list, because I think she needs to sell the poor horse as a two star horse or dressage prospect. That's just my opinion, Tiana can obviously do what she wants with her horse. I wish the team wouldn't encourage it.

    And don't get me started on MLM. Running a CCI3* with RF Demeter without a single event prior since Rolex? Publicly lashing out at at DOC (regardless of how it sounded, she was pissed at DOC) when he told her to run Smoke slower than full speed, and blaming him for her time faults? Running a seven year old at all at the CCI3* level? (I would probably not slam that last fact if there weren't so many other questionable decisions she made, along with the fact that Smoke was definitely off at the final jog.) Many other rumors abound as well. Regardless of her income level, she is a poor horseman.


    11 members found this post helpful.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jun. 22, 2001
    Location
    Coatesville, Pa.
    Posts
    5,468

    Default

    Ok I am gonna tread in carefully here. I think the lists are very accurate to what the standards are:

    Combinations that currently possess the ability to win anywhere in the world

    Combinations that currently possess the ability to be competitive anywhere in the world

    Combinations that are currently competitive in domestic international-level competition, and who the USEF Selection Committee feel have the future potential to be competitive anywhere in the world


    Those on the National list are all competent riders. But as we saw at the Olympics we as a whole need to step it up to be competitive on the global scene.

    I agree that Sinead is our only Reliable international competitor. Neville is great.. and a strong crowd fav, but he can be less reliable. Same goes for Arthur. Notice I am pinning the lack of consistency on the horse as I believe both Boyd and Allison to be amazing riders and if either were magically gifted a horse that was a true match to their abilities and consistent, I think you'd see them on the global list. Phillip isn't there simply due to a post-Olympic year horse changeover. Back these rules up to when he had any of his previous stars and he'd be there. Its just a lack of horse.

    Let me also have a moment of pontification on a subject I believe is the basis for the people on these lists and their positions. We don't choose the best partners for our ambitions. Our horses are lovely as individuals but their single bits of random brilliance do not steadily add up to being a Sam, Parklane Hawk, Rutherglen, any of the International horses that can be ridden in an explosive dressage atmosphere and NAIL it every.single.time. Some argue this is because we con't have a national breeding program to produce quality animals, and that because most of our mounts are either racing castoffs or stolen...errr imported from Europe's castoffs... we don't start with the highest quality. Now it's true anyone of the horses on these lists could develop into that. But we haven't seen it yet.

    Another thing we should get used to in the modern era.... The awesome xc horses that are sympathetic favorites won't earn a place on the team easily if at all. David wants the US to win medals. That's 1,2 or 3. Not 4th. So we can't afford the spot on the team to go to the quirky awesome superstar that is brilliant over jumps but less than enthusiastic about dressage. Although interestingly enough, the new way does open the door for the "King William" or "Tipperary Liadhan" conundrum.

    So going back in time the horses we consider "greats" of the sport would also be relegated to either just the national list or worse left off entirely. It's a new version of the same game. But now it's going to be tougher to get a spot on the team. That's not news. David's plans are pretty soundly constructed and if we ignore MLM and the obvious O'Connor bias, the lists seem good. But with new plans comes new realities.

    We won't know the outcome of these lists and their psychological and actual effects until time passes on more. Do you think maybe David knocked Boyd down a peg with Neville to remind him that dressage is more important than xc brilliance now. Did he bop Tiana back as a reminder that she still has a lot of homework to do? And how awesome is it to see Bea DiGrazia back on a USET list!!!! My friends out west say that's a really nice horse. I am hoping to get to be able to see more of them.

    Also worth noting... the Middleburg, Va dominance is less. Only 3 riders, Allison, Meredith and Hannah Sue are from that area, those from Unionville and the vicinity have jumped back into the fold. Also some Californians are back. They've had a bit of a rough time getting team attention for a while. Some obvious exceptions exist, but still nice to see some folks from the west.

    So while we could rip this apart all day, we now have to see what happens because of this. Personally I am willing to bet we see more than one injury because some may push too hard, too fast. Not on purpose mind you, but I bet a few of those who may not know what it takes to produce a mentally and physically sound global talent will get caught out with an ugly ultrasound.
    I also wouldn't be shocked to see a bad case of nerves pop up at Rolex for someone who does well in training sessions.

    Mind you I am not wishing these folks to have problems, it's just what I see could happen under this kind of pressure and scrutiny. The old way you were on the radar or off. And those on felt pretty secure and those off were totally into getting on. This way.... with a ladder effect... you can go up or down, and you'd really only have yourself to blame for it. That can cause some serious mind farts.

    ~Emily
    "Courage is not the absence of fear but rather the judgment that something is more important than fear. The brave may not live forever but the cautious do not live at all." ~2001 The Princess Diaries


    1 members found this post helpful.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Jul. 2, 2012
    Posts
    10

    Default

    JER, I certainly agree with you that Will Faudree's fall form wouldn't seem to merit inclusion on the World Class list...But, as you said, and I agree, there is always going to be a subjective element. It has been known for a while that the selectors like Andromaque, particularly because she doesn't pull XC. Even with her not perfect form in 2012, there was talk of putting her on the team anyway because she was a very good style for Greenwich, as she wouldn't take much time to set up over the twisty course. Given her quite good dressage mark at Burghley, a 45.8, and given the fact that there is obviously major emphasis on good dressage getting a pair earmarked to get on a list, she probably earned her spot subjectively, with the assumption that she has the potential to rise back up to the top. That would be my guess as to why she got on the World Class list. In 2011, her form at Lumuhlen before she got hurt was also indicative of "ability to be competitive anywhere in the world."



  16. #36
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2000
    Location
    passepartout
    Posts
    10,038

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xctrygirl View Post
    Our horses are lovely as individuals but their single bits of random brilliance do not steadily add up to being a Sam, Parklane Hawk, Rutherglen, any of the International horses that can be ridden in an explosive dressage atmosphere and NAIL it every.single.time. Some argue this is because we don't have a national breeding program to produce quality animals, and that because most of our mounts are either racing castoffs or stolen...
    Which of our riders do you think measures up to Michael Jung, William Fox-Pitt or Andrew Hoy?

    Parklane Hawk is an OTTB. Raced 19 times with no wins and a pair of places.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Apr. 2, 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    5,234

    Default

    Awww, JER you beat me to Parklane Hawk -- although I thought he had something like 140 starts, must have been a media misprint. But definitely not some national-stud prancy warmblood!



  18. #38
    Join Date
    Apr. 30, 2002
    Location
    Looking up
    Posts
    6,158

    Default

    I like Em's ladder effect assessment, because it is going to do what she said -- it's going to put the right kind of competition pressure on these pairs. I really hope that more riders use this as motivation.

    Some people ride to have fun. Some, to educate their horses. Some, to enjoy different venues and comraderie. All of those fit US, ammies, in eventing. DOC is asking that we accept a new paradigm -- let's ride to WIN. That's a fourth dimension that riders that are not on the list need to read again. Ride to win. That is the reason I think some are not on lists. And it is not about the horse not liking this or that. It is about putting it all together, not once in a lifetime, but EVERY event. Every time.
    "Passion, though a bad regulator, is a powerful spring." -- Emerson
    www.eventhorse.wordpress.com



  19. #39
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    12,621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eventer2012 View Post
    I would like to remind people that the Spring 2013 training lists come out based mostly on three day form from Fall 2012...It is primarily for this reason that Colleen is left off the list. I watched her test at Pau, which scored a 62.2, and I will yield to bornfreenowexpensive that her 62.2 isn't that bad of a test...other than the flying changes, it was a fairly consistent and quiet test. What left her off the list this time is the 28 time faults XC and 3 rails and 4 time faults in the SJ. This is a total of 44 faults added to her dressage score...That is equivalent to over 2 stops XC. So while there are many people that think "his jumping is so consistently good", based on her most recent three day result, the jumping actually hurt her more than the dressage. For example, say the selectors said "Colleen, if you can get below a 50 on the flat at a 3* or 4*, we will put you on the list." Her Pau result was only 12 points off from that, the equivalent of 3 rails...So if she was consistently finishing double clear xc and sj, it might be worth it to put her on the list, as compared to a pair that could get around a 50 at an international FEI competition (overseas, not the US) but might have 3 rails, or the equivalent of 12 faults (xc time and sj faults combined). But since she had the 62 in the dressage and 44 jumping/time faults, there is no reason for the selectors to consider putting her on the list.

    Does that make sense numerically, regardless of the politics that are always involved in selection? I am very much a "numbers" person, so I just want people to let their emotions be less involved and think with their head logically before they make statements. This is not pointed at anyone directly, just wanted to lay out my sentiments with logic to back it up.

    I disagree with your characterization of Pau this year. The footing was bad...it was a very tough course. There were a LOT of very experienced and consistent pairs who didn't get around. The fact that she did complete says a lot. Yet we have horses on the national list who have not even done a 3*???? And we leave off one of our most consistent 4* horses....who is sound and not that old??? Sorry....I don't buy it. I don't think her performance at Pau left her off the list. I'm not sure what did......and honestly I don't care. The politics and the "team" have left a bad taste in my mouth for a long time. And in the end...I don't really care. Someone making the list....while nice....isn't what gets me to cheer them on or makes me think they are anything super special. There are some really good and special horses and riders on that list....but making that list isn't what makes them good or special.

    I've not thought of riding for the team as being the top of our sport anyway.

    Riding to win is fine and dandy....but you have to be able to complete first. I'd just be happy if more US riders could consistently get around and finish all three phases at the 4* level.....then we can talk about actually winning some.
    ** The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits. -- Albert Einstein **


    4 members found this post helpful.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Apr. 13, 2005
    Posts
    3,876

    Default

    We need to stop being so worried about the 'OTTB' stigma. Do you think WFP says hmm, it's a gamble given that is an ex-racer?! Please. I wish some of the UL would stop trying to be so cool, and concentrate on the horse(s) they have in front of them. Perhaps we'd have better horse-ownership. Neville is an amazing horse, another OTTB. However, I guess cool pays. Given the cost of the sport, those that aren't already bank-rolled w.insurance, have to make some marketing decisions. I can't help but wonder if people from other countries laugh at inability to exploit our best, most economical resource; the TB. Considering the German's are competing 15/16th TB's with brands on their rumps.

    Boyd's fancy-French horse couldn't stay sound. Sineads can; but he's a perfect example of having faith in a horse that others might have passed by (at the opposite end of the OTTB spectrum)...I'm not sure he was the coolest option when she was searching

    Disappointing not to see Colleen; but very happy to see Becky on the list. Some of the other names & horses make you wonder...sure, 3* horses, but why does an established 3* horse lacking scope & dressage deserve to be on any list when Colleen isn't?! WHAT DO THEY HAVE TO OFFER?! Why are we so forgiving of rotational falls? The fact that Allison's horse isn't on the World Class list is laughable. The one that doesn't quite bother me is Neville, he had an injury & is coming back - so, at the moment not a 'World Competitor' but that's just a matter or time.


    2 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 148
    Last Post: Nov. 15, 2012, 08:24 AM
  2. 2012 Four Seasons Horse Show Prize List
    By GingerCookie in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Mar. 4, 2012, 07:26 AM
  3. Revised 2012 FEI Prohibited Substance List Effective Jan. 1
    By VirginiaBred in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Oct. 6, 2011, 08:58 PM
  4. 2009 Winter Training List
    By hoofhearted in forum Eventing
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: Nov. 23, 2008, 10:19 PM
  5. Replies: 21
    Last Post: Aug. 12, 2008, 04:01 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
  •  
randomness