The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 38
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    18,648

    Default Event Riders Petition to FEI to change the new MERs

    From ERA, the British equivalent of PRO:
    URGENT – We need you to support our petition to the FEI

    The FEI Eventing Committee meets early next week (w/c 4th March 2013). ERA (amongst others) has put forward proposals to try to alleviate some of the issues being caused by the new “Requirements to Participate”. Now we need your backing as riders, so please read and, if you can, support our online petition by clicking here.
    https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitio...share_petition
    Here's the petition:

    The new requirements to participate in Eventing introduced in 2013 are having considerable negative impact on riders and horses.

    1. Advanced horses and riders are having to go all the way back to 1-star competition, putting additional mileage on horses and extra costs on riders and owners. ERA propose that any horse and rider who have both achieved a 3-star or 4-star MER, should not be required to do 1-star level competitions regardless of Category.

    2. The requirement to achieve all FEI MERs as a combination is again impacting the welfare of horses and creating considerable additional cost for riders and owners and impacting the value of schoolmaster horses. ERA support the GBR NF proposal that where multiple MERs are required by the FEI, one of those MERs can be achieved separately by horse and rider.

    3. The MERs required for a Category are too high, even with the mitigations in place for 2013. ERA propose that the mitigations introduced as a temporary measure in 2013 are made permanent.

    4. 15 MERs at 3-Star level to gain a B Category is too hard, given the number of runs that are available and practical at that level. ERA propose that the number of 3-star MERs required to gain a Category B or A are immediately reduced to 10 and that the number of MERs is further reviewed before 2014.

    5. Defining an uncategorised International Athlete as a "National Rider" is derogatory and causing upset. ERA propose that the term "National Rider" rider is changed to "Uncategorised International Rider"
    Just thought that some US participation would be welcome.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire



  2. #2
    Join Date
    May. 17, 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    264

    Default

    Thanks vineyridge. Yes, US signatures very very welcome. Many riders are being very unfairly impacted by this rule, for instance Tiana Coudray is just ONE MER at 3* short of being Category B, which really affects her with new ride. The number the FEI has picked to set for gaining a Category is very high and it has been a real shock to a lot of people... if there had been a warning, other choices could have been made last season.
    For an explanation of how the rules impact on Amateurs in particular, it's worth having a look at the article I wrote at
    http://e-venting.co.uk/?p=200
    or at the extensive Q&A document on the www.eventridersassociation.org.uk site.
    Please get as many people as possible to sign the petition! Thanks.



  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct. 14, 2005
    Posts
    2,607

    Default

    So basically there are only six US riders (with qualifications at the four star level) that could buy a four star horse and compete without requalifying? It seems that if both horse and rider are qualified for a level independently of each other they should be able to compete at that level together without having to requalify together. I understand if one or the other isn't qualified, but the three star rider at my barn could buy an experienced four star horse and still have to begin at the one star level if I'm understanding correctly.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan. 21, 2009
    Location
    Virginia zip 20120
    Posts
    490

    Default

    signed the petition and shared it on my network of horse friends/riders/equestrian businesses...
    “Always saddle your own horse. Always know what you’re doing. And go in the direction you are heading.” Connie Reeves
    Jump Start Solutions LLC



  5. #5
    Join Date
    May. 17, 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    264

    Default

    eqsui, the 'going back to 1* level' is particularly badly thought out, I think. 2* maybe but 1* is too small for most Adv horses imho, and of course it impacts on the genuine 1* competitors...



  6. #6
    Join Date
    May. 17, 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by barnworkbeatshousework View Post
    signed the petition and shared it on my network of horse friends/riders/equestrian businesses...
    Great, thanks. We have about 350 signatures, need a lot more really! Please spread the word everyone.



  7. #7
    Join Date
    May. 12, 2008
    Posts
    4,068

    Default

    Can someone break this down into English?

    What is an MER?

    What is Category B or A?



  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2008
    Posts
    708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajierene View Post
    Can someone break this down into English?

    What is an MER?

    What is Category B or A?
    Minimum Eligibility Requirement

    http://www.fei.org/sites/default/fil...0%28USA%29.pdf



  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2009
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,665

    Default

    Wow that has to be one of the most non thought through rules they have come up with.



  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Signed. These qualification requirements will destroy the sport. It definitely destroys the ability of any amateur who may want/can get to the *** level and even puts at risk the ** amateur given what is need to maintain qualifications.

    Perhaps this is a royal idiotness plan to decimate the sport as she originally wanted to do years ago?


    7 members found this post helpful.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb. 27, 2008
    Location
    Middleburg, VA
    Posts
    1,120

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    These qualification requirements will destroy the sport. It definitely destroys the ability of any amateur who may want/can get to the *** level and even puts at risk the ** amateur given what is need to maintain qualifications.
    How do you reckon that? I don't really think the categorization have a ton of impact on the typical amateur who might only have one or two horses. Basically, the amateurs will simply need to sticking to bringing horses up through the levels as a horse/rider pair. I don't necessarily think that's a terrible thing for amateurs.

    For pros, I see many issues. For the average ammie, not so much. Particularly since the qualifications as a pair no longer expire. You don't need to maintain qualifications, you need to maintain categorization.



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2000
    Location
    passepartout
    Posts
    10,074

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Divine Comedy View Post
    Basically, the amateurs will simply need to sticking to bringing horses up through the levels as a horse/rider pair. I don't necessarily think that's a terrible thing for amateurs.
    This is fine it it's your choice. I don't think the FEI should be foisting this on riders who don't choose to make eventing their career.

    I'd like to see the data and statistical evidence that supports this FEI rule change.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan. 6, 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,329

    Default

    Signed and passed on.
    I am on my phone 90% of the time. Please ignore typos, misplaced lower case letters, and the random word butchered by autocowreck.




  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb. 27, 2008
    Location
    Middleburg, VA
    Posts
    1,120

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JER View Post
    This is fine it it's your choice. I don't think the FEI should be foisting this on riders who don't choose to make eventing their career.
    Fair enough. I just think saying that it will "destroy the ability of any amateur who may want/can get to *** level" is a bit of an exaggeration. Destroy the ability of the young pro very possibly. But amateurs can still make it up through the level without too much difficulty if they make the choice to qualify as a pair. The amateur has fewer options (as in, can't buy more than a going 1* horse), but their ability isn't 'destroyed', in my opinion.

    The young pro? Definitely could destroy their ability to build a business.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2009
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,665

    Default

    And when it destroys the ability of the young pro to make a business the amateurs who found nothing wrong with the rule and did not speak up since hey this doesn't affect me can not complain when there are fewer and fewer schoolmasters in their price range as the only pros left are riders like Boyd, Karen etc to buy from.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb. 27, 2008
    Location
    Middleburg, VA
    Posts
    1,120

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Couture TB View Post
    And when it destroys the ability of the young pro to make a business the amateurs who found nothing wrong with the rule and did not speak up since hey this doesn't affect me can not complain when there are fewer and fewer schoolmasters in their price range as the only pros left are riders like Boyd, Karen etc to buy from.
    Excuse me, I didn't say I liked the rule. I did, in fact, sign the petition on behalf of all those young pros, many of whom are my friends. And also, not all amateurs buy schoolmasters. Please don't think that I am arguing in favor of the rule.

    I am simply stating that, in my opinion, the rule change does not affect upper level amateurs all that much. Primarily they would simply have to choose to make their way up the levels through one avenue, but they DO have the ability to do it. To say their ability to move up the levels is 'destroyed' is, in my opinion, exaggerated.

    I strongly disagree with the rule on behalf of all young pros (many of whom are NOT cheap to buy schoolmasters from, nor should they be if they produce quality horses!).



  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Divine Comedy View Post
    How do you reckon that? I don't really think the categorization have a ton of impact on the typical amateur who might only have one or two horses. Basically, the amateurs will simply need to sticking to bringing horses up through the levels as a horse/rider pair. I don't necessarily think that's a terrible thing for amateurs.

    For pros, I see many issues. For the average ammie, not so much. Particularly since the qualifications as a pair no longer expire. You don't need to maintain qualifications, you need to maintain categorization.
    There are plenty of amateurs who are older and who have the capabilities to run *** and ***** but who don't have the time to go back and start a new horse every time. They may have run that high in the past and now they have now "establishment" to allow them to go again. You speak because you are young and have plenty of time to start over, if YOU wish. Others don't have that option.

    You are right, the "average ammie" is not the concern, but the upper level ammie will be drummed out of the opportunity, e.g. destroyed.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb. 27, 2008
    Location
    Middleburg, VA
    Posts
    1,120

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    There are plenty of amateurs who are older and who have the capabilities to run *** and ***** but who don't have the time to go back and start a new horse every time. They may have run that high in the past and now they have now "establishment" to allow them to go again. You speak because you are young and have plenty of time to start over, if YOU wish. Others don't have that option.
    That's a valid concern that I hadn't considered. I suppose it also makes difficulties for the Nina Ligons, Ronald Zabalas, and Carl Bouckarts (Not sure if I spelled that correctly) of the sport as well. Even the Japanese, who did so well on the first phase this time around. And since those all made it to the Olympics by getting enough points on qualified upper level horses, that would certainly change the landscape of the Olympics in a direction that I wouldn't necessarily agree with. Regardless of the state of the amateur at the upper levels, this rule certainly would destroy the ability of the amateur to ride in the Olympics.

    I still think destroy is a bit strong of a word for the upper levels, but I completely concede that it is not as simple as I was perceiving it.

    As an aside, I absolutely think it was total bullsh** to introduce this rule without a year's warning to allow people to at least try to get their ducks in order for categorization qualifications. Or qualifications in general, as I'm aware of at least one person who now needs another CIC3* before Rolex when she thought herself qualified.



  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr. 30, 2002
    Location
    Looking up
    Posts
    6,195

    Default

    We as Americans always seem to be blindsided, or at least behind the curve, on these FEI rule changes. I am not sure WHO at the USET should be watching the store, but I would like to point out that we need to be as up on the rule changes while they are in the committee stages, as the European nations. The way to do THAT, I assume, is to have a couple of folks on these committees or attending the meetings, or simply hobnobbing in Europe with the people who are proposing changes. Does that happen?

    We always seem to have a sort of "you stink" attitude toward the FEI and I daresay....that attitude does have a record of biting us in the ass on a regular basis. (Weighted hind boots?)

    By the time they put these changes through, they've gone through a process of comment and exchange or at least on paper that is what is done. I am just sayin'...isn't there someone at the USET keeping up on this stuff BEFORE it gets to the point of no return?

    They do not want riders like the Japanese (first in dressage, last in XC) in the Olympics and World championships in eventing, and I think personally these regs are designed to stop that carnage. I think it (London) WAS unsafe and unfair most of all to the horses in that example.

    The FEI will be effective in achieving that goal if the regs stay the same. I don't think they give a crap about amateurs or professionals with these regs. But if it is hard on the horses that is where you have to go to change it. The most powerful argument, in my opinion. They want to insure that pairs qualify together, and that one does not simply buy the ride by the deadline. Doesn't that try to take money OUT of the equation? To ensure performance qualifies the rider and horse together?
    "Passion, though a bad regulator, is a powerful spring." -- Emerson
    www.eventhorse.wordpress.com


    1 members found this post helpful.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    18,648

    Default

    Robert Kellerhouse is ON the FEI Eventing Committee. IIRC, there are only six members on that committee. If he isn't communicating and working with the USEF at the preliminary stages, there would be a problem. But, and I'm just guessiing here, he probably does keep the USEF in the loop.

    The difference between the US and GB is how very active in all ways BE seems to be compared with USEA. Of course, they probably are much better funded.

    Part of the problem seems to be lack of communication with the affected people at early stages of the discussion. Whether that is a USEF flaw or an FEI, who can tell?

    Quote Originally Posted by retreadeventer View Post
    We as Americans always seem to be blindsided, or at least behind the curve, on these FEI rule changes. I am not sure WHO at the USET should be watching the store, but I would like to point out that we need to be as up on the rule changes while they are in the committee stages, as the European nations. The way to do THAT, I assume, is to have a couple of folks on these committees or attending the meetings, or simply hobnobbing in Europe with the people who are proposing changes. Does that happen?

    We always seem to have a sort of "you stink" attitude toward the FEI and I daresay....that attitude does have a record of biting us in the ass on a regular basis. (Weighted hind boots?)

    By the time they put these changes through, they've gone through a process of comment and exchange or at least on paper that is what is done. I am just sayin'...isn't there someone at the USET keeping up on this stuff BEFORE it gets to the point of no return?

    They do not want riders like the Japanese (first in dressage, last in XC) in the Olympics and World championships in eventing, and I think personally these regs are designed to stop that carnage. I think it (London) WAS unsafe and unfair most of all to the horses in that example.

    The FEI will be effective in achieving that goal if the regs stay the same. I don't think they give a crap about amateurs or professionals with these regs. But if it is hard on the horses that is where you have to go to change it. The most powerful argument, in my opinion. They want to insure that pairs qualify together, and that one does not simply buy the ride by the deadline. Doesn't that try to take money OUT of the equation? To ensure performance qualifies the rider and horse together?
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: Mar. 16, 2010, 06:47 PM
  2. What Event Riders Really Need?
    By barbaraG in forum Eventing
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: Oct. 17, 2007, 09:45 AM
  3. Event Riders......Where is the credit????
    By 3dayeventing in forum Eventing
    Replies: 146
    Last Post: Aug. 16, 2006, 03:59 PM
  4. Replies: 152
    Last Post: Jan. 3, 2005, 07:32 AM

Posting Permissions

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