I don’t think the uncertain economic situation and the impending war in Iraq is keeping American eventing from thriving. There are more competitors at all levels than I’ve ever seen before. We seem to be on a wave of popularity and growth.

 

But there are very serious issues on the horizon threatening the future of what we do. The FEI Three-Day Event Committee held a meeting on the weekend of March 8-9 in Warendorf, Germany, which may have a major impact on our future because they were scheduled to discuss a proposal to eliminate the three-day event. It’s clear that there are forces within the Federation Equestre Internationale, outside of the eventing leadership, that are trying to dictate the future of our sport(for more information see In The Country).

 

Make no mistake’three-day eventing is under attack. We’re in the middle of a tremendous push to totally change the sport, from top to bottom.

 

A few people argue that eliminating the three-day event would have no effect on the rest of the sport, but I find that completely misguided. Why would you want to take away the flagship of any organization, sport or endeavor?

 

The three-day event is the biggest attraction to our sport’even for people who have no aspiration to ride in one. The one-day event, including the CIC (international horse trial), is an avenue to get to the three-day and a worthy goal for many riders. But the three-day event is still our biggest prize.

 

Does anyone think that Rolex Kentucky, Badminton (England) or Burghley (England) would remain the huge spectator events that they are if they weren’t each full three-day events?

 

In the name of safety’and rightfully so’the three-day has changed a lot over the last 10 years. We now have more jumping efforts over shorter distances, and while I think that the jury is out on whether this is easier on the horse or not, it definitely has shifted the emphasis to rideability.

 

The three-day of the past was a test of bold-jumping horses who jumped out of one speed over a long distance. Now, we’re much more inclined to test the abilities of a horse and rider to jump out of a wide range of speeds over very technical fences. This still takes a fast, nimble, well-trained horse, and the Thoroughbred is still going to be the horse you want in the CIC format.

 

The sport had to go in that direction, and I applaud course designers like Michael Etherington-Smith, who has always seemed to find the correct balance on the championship courses he designs. (He’s designed Kentucky for the last 10 years, as well as the 2000 Sydney Olympics.)

 

We needed to change, and we responded. I was a part of the FEI’s ad hoc safety committee a few years back, along with auto racing legend Jackie Stewart and others. We studied the sport from a myriad of angles to try to recommend a way for the future.

 

I’m proud to say that many of our ideas are being used today. For example, I think the rest stop on phase C to allow the horses to truly recover from the steeplechase has had a huge impact on many horses’ ability to complete the competition in good shape.

 

These changes have also strengthened the CIC. It’s a great format for international competitors to use and to promote eventing. I don’t think that there are many people who wouldn’t like to see the current one-day event formalized onto the international arena. These changes have had a positive impact on the sport, but are we going too far?

 

The elimination of the three-day event, which was being proposed as I wrote this, is a wholly irresponsible proposal. We have already agreed to change the format for the Olympic Games in Athens and Beijing, but I don’t think all three-days should be slashed.

 

We’ve already dealt with safety, which is being cited as a major incentive for this proposal. Let’s face facts: Anything that has an element of speed’whether bicycles, cars or horses’has a risk element. We cannot make this sport safer than life itself, and horses gallop just as fast (perhaps even faster) in a CIC as in a CCI. Research supports my belief that the CIC is not safer than the CCI, so this shouldn’t be a factor in any decision.

 

I am the greatest proponent of the theory that anything we can do to make the sport safer, we are obligated to do, right away. But I am unwilling to agree that the three-day event is unacceptably risky. The idea is to make the sport safer in its current form, not to destroy it.

 

The three-day’s opponents also claim that the CIC is less expensive to organize because it doesn’t have the steeplechase or roads and tracks phases. But most of the Olympic cities of the past 20 years (especially Seoul, Barcelona and Sydney, and even Los Angeles and Atlanta) have had no equestrian center nearby and have built one from scratch.

 

Obviously, FEI officials have no influ-ence in picking the Olympic cities, but they do choose the sites for the World Equestrian Games. Long-standing three-day events have already put the infrastructure in place to run these events on an achievable budget, so the WEG sites should go to countries or cities that already have the facilities. I don’t think it’s co-incidental that Aachen (site of the 2008 WEG) will have to build an entirely new cross-country course. If FEI officials had chosen Lexington, Ky., for 2008, I wonder if this proposal would have been made?

 

Why do I get the feeling that the three-day event is under attack so that future championship organizers who do not have a three-day site won’t be obligated to build one?

 

Politics and economics are factors in many human decisions, and I hope they’re not the only reasons that the three-day event is being threatened. If it really is a question of economics, then I’m sure that a proposal to have all countries contribute annually to a fund for site development at future Olympics and WEGs would be well received. After all, it’s up to us to drive the horse sports that we love into the public eye.

 

The changes that have already been made to the Olympic format are acceptable to most of us who have been fortunate to ride at that level and who’ve had the honor to compete for our country. But we don’t need to restructure or eliminate the three-day event.

 

If the three-day opponent’s proposal succeeds, I propose that the United States and other nations that have a strong eventing tradition (especially England, Ireland, New Zealand, Australia) continue to hold their three-day events, outside of the FEI. We could use the same rules we have now, but under the auspices of our national federations, instead of the FEI.

 

We have the moral and ethical backgrounds to run these events and to protect the sport that people love so much. The three-day event has a future, and we must be willing to promote and protect this sport, despite the antagonists within the FEI.