• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Boekelo Grants Announced

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Benchmarks are useful things when money is involved. There could be a benchmark for the dressage phase--69%; for xc--fewer than 10 total penalties; and stadium--no more than 8 pp. Unless a horse and rider combination meet the benchmarks HERE at the level involved at least twice, they don't get USET funding for trips abroad.

    Obviously the goal of XC should be double clear; the goal of dressage should be over 70% and the goal of stadium should also be double clear. There are a rather large number of riders at Boekelo who scored 69% in dressage which then gives them a fighting chance to move up with the other two phases. Without that 69%, though, perfect performance the rest of the way will, in 98% of the cases, keep them far from the podium.

    The USET could identify promising pairs and help with their training HERE. The benchmarks could and should be lower for training assistance HERE.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by EventerAJ View Post
      I don't think this weekend was a bad showing. Was it competitive? No. But as someone said, we have to compete against the best to be the best. Clearly, staying at home and beating ourselves hasn't really done much. You can do all the homework you want, but you need a real test to see where you are and how to improve. "Take home tests" don't have the same effect.

      I think we *do* need more US riders who spend time training in Europe. It did Sinead and Allison a world of good this summer. It would be great if we could budget some funding for that. But it's not just as easy as it sounds-- these riders leave their families and business behind for several months. Someone else has to teach their students, feed the horses at home, ride the youngsters. There's still bills at home to pay, in addition to bills overseas. It requires a strong support group, and a good source of funds to make it happen. I agree that it NEEDS to be done...but it's not so easy as "Hop a plane with your horse and go train with WFP."
      Bold is mine. Firstly, that is what I don't understand: How does going overseas and doing poorly make us better? Why does competing against people WAY better than us make us better? Is is supposed to motivate us? Is it supposed to confirm what we deep down already know but don't want to admit, that we are not up to par any longer? This overseas catastrophe began at the 2008 Olympics. Save for a few exceptions here and there (namely Sinead, Allison, and the Pan Am team, of course that was a 2* without much real competition) the message has been loud and clear for FOUR YEARS that we need to do something differently. We have not been competitive oversreas for a long time now and clearly our current methods are not working.

      Secondly, maybe the funding would be more readily available if we used the funding from things like the Boekolo grants or if we didn't send every Olympic qualified horse plus their backup to England this summer (an exaggeration of course, but I believe we sent too many.) There's no good reason to spend money that would be useful elsewhere to send riders overseas who are not prepared to be competitive.

      Originally posted by vineyridge View Post
      Benchmarks are useful things when money is involved. There could be a benchmark for the dressage phase--69%; for xc--fewer than 10 total penalties; and stadium--no more than 8 pp. Unless a horse and rider combination meet the benchmarks HERE at the level involved at least twice, they don't get USET funding for trips abroad.

      Obviously the goal of XC should be double clear; the goal of dressage should be over 70% and the goal of stadium should also be double clear. There are a rather large number of riders at Boekelo who scored 69% in dressage which then gives them a fighting chance to move up with the other two phases. Without that 69%, though, perfect performance the rest of the way will, in 98% of the cases, keep them far from the podium.

      The USET could identify promising pairs and help with their training HERE. The benchmarks could and should be lower for training assistance HERE.
      THIS! Very well said and I agree that a horse and rider should have to prove themselves before they get that privelige of funding.

      Comment


      • #63
        I guess I disagree. I think we sent the right horses and their results are fine. This was a 3*. We didn't send out best 3* horses. We sent horses who we think will be some of our best 4* horses in the near future. Competing abroad had a lot of logistics that competing from home does not have. Our riders and horses need more experience flying and competing than our European counterparts. And each of these horses and riders DID already prove they are worth the investment.

        I don't give a rat's a$$ if we win at the 3* level. I want to see us win and be competitive at WEG in 2 years....and therefore want as many of our good young horses and riders getting experience flying and putting together a competition.

        If this same group was flown over again next year with poor results...then I might bitch and groan a bit more. But a horse that will be competitive in 2 years may not be as competitive this year. What I'm sure the team and selectors are focusing on is how did they handle this stress...and what do we need to focus on for each pair.

        I guess I'm just not going too get to worked up over it now.
        ** Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip. ~Winston Churchill? **

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by TwinGates View Post
          And for clarification, the BNR who has taken 1/2 day in 8 mo's b/c he "has things that need improvement in his riding" is 2008 Individual Gold medalist, Andreas Dibowski.
          Hinrich Romeike was the 2008 Individual gold medalist. Don't forget the galloping dentist!!

          Andreas Dibowski, a professional rider, was on the gold medal team in 2008.
          Blugal

          You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng

          Comment


          • #65
            The horses that are successful at championships have been contesting top level events for at least 2 years before the championship.

            I don't think it is a good strategy to send CIC3* horses, and horses new to the level, to championships.

            As someone else pointed out, Boekelo was a testing ground for many of today's top horses back in 2010.

            In London, the results looked like:

            Gold - Michael & Sam - competing at top level since at least 2010 (WEG)
            Silver - Sara & Wega - contested Boekelo in 2010
            Bronze - Sandra and Opgun Luovo - contested Boekelo in 2010

            So all were long-term partnerships and all had been going at least CCI*** since 2010.
            Blugal

            You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Blugal View Post
              The horses that are successful at championships have been contesting top level events for at least 2 years before the championship.

              While I agree.....I also think given our history of breaking our horses and riders, we need as wide a pool as possible. Our top riders and horses have already been abroad this year. This was just another group to me.
              ** Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip. ~Winston Churchill? **

              Comment


              • #67
                bornfree, I don't think I explained myself well! I was basically agreeing with you.

                By championships, I mean Olympics, WEG. Don't send new/green horses to the level to these championships. Send horses who have been going at least 3* for 2 years.
                Blugal

                You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Blugal View Post
                  bornfree, I don't think I explained myself well! I was basically agreeing with you.

                  By championships, I mean Olympics, WEG. Don't send new/green horses to the level to these championships. Send horses who have been going at least 3* for 2 years.
                  Got it! And to me...their first time or two at a championship like this, I don't expect them to win.

                  I just find it funny that people bitch that we are sending the same people all the time....and then when we send different horses and riders...they bitch again that they didn't win. I thought these riders and horses did well for where they are in their careers. Now let's keep them sound....and keep improving.
                  ** Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip. ~Winston Churchill? **

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    I'm not disagreeing with BFNE and Blugal that foreign CCI experience is needed for future championships.

                    But unlike countries which do not rely on private funding sources for their entire high performance system, the USEF has money problems. It always has and it always will. My point is that given the financial restrictions, USEF needs to ensure the most bang for its limited bucks.

                    Build up the basic skills necessary for horses and riders to do well internationally HERE before sending them abroad on "run and home" trips that cost a comparative fortune. OR base riders in Europe the way the Aussies and Kiwis do. I'd prefer that our horses would be competitive before we send them to International competitions.

                    Start here. Build up eventing here so it is producing riders with internationally competitive scores HERE. Toughen our standards. Then send them off for seasoning.
                    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
                    Thread killer Extraordinaire

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you either, viney. I don't think it is absolutely essential to be based in the UK, because I have seen examples of North-America based riders kicking butt. But, in many cases it has helped.

                      Cases in point:

                      Sinead took the initiative and based herself with Mark and Sandy Phillips, then WFP for a over year back in '08.

                      Rebecca Howard of Canada took the initiative and moved to the UK after the 2012 Olympics.

                      David and Karen O did this way back when, spent 5 years in the UK.

                      Tiana's decision to base herself in the UK arguably got her on the team (never mind the actual result at the Olympics) and she is still in the UK and probably setting herself up for 2014.
                      Blugal

                      You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Oh, and one more thing.

                        Maybe rather than trying to get another 4* in North America, we should be collaborating (Canada/US) to make an international team competition, the likes of Boekelo, at Fair Hill. Kind of like the Ledyard of old?
                        Blugal

                        You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Seems to me that Allison kind of proves the measure of sending over folks who aren't really all the way there yet to compete overseas. Remember that she and Arthur made a bunch of trips to Europe and came home with either letter scores or well down the board before this year's Burghley success. Someone can keep me honest, but if if I'm remembering correctly, I believe she was eliminated at Burghley, had a stop at Blenheim, a stop at Pau, and maybe eliminated at Luhmuhlen? I may not have that quite right, but there was a decently long strings of not-so-great overseas, even as she was getting decent ribbons at Rolex and Fair Hill. Perhaps it just took the work of going over, not having things go well, and retooling and fixing until she got to the right level - and that wouldn't have happened had she stayed here and kept running the same courses. If that's the case, see,s like the experience of competing over there, even if the intermediate results aren't super, is a worthwhile part of the process.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            GotSpots, there is no question that the experiences all led to where she is today. But, IIRC, she was pretty much self-financed, wasn't she? Self financed riders can spend their own or their sponsors' money any way they like.

                            There ought to be ways to decrease the cost of trips abroad, like sharing pallets (or whatever the term of art may be), and perhaps USEF could help set those up.
                            "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
                            Thread killer Extraordinaire

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              [QUOTE But, IIRC, she was pretty much self-financed, wasn't she? Self financed riders can spend their own or their sponsors' money any way they like. [/QUOTE]

                              Viney the grants were given to the riders from Land Rover. Can't a company decide where they want to spend their money ? Perhaps the Land Rover PTB read all the bi%%#ching on the COTH BB and decided that it would be a good idea to send less experienced riders overseas (sans Phillip) to gain valuable experience. They were given $15,000 each. Probably not enough to cover all their expenses. The rest I assume (perhaps incorrectly) was self funded.
                              Anyhow, travelling with the horses, learning their recovery issues, figuring out warmups, downtime needed etc. This is all necessary information to get down before one is sent to the "big show". Each horse is an individual, and you don't want to be faced with a stupid mistake that you could have figured out ahead of time with a trial run. Every trip like this is a huge learning experience that you can't gain by going to Fair Hill. JMHO.
                              In addition, this was our B,C, or D, team (again leaving Philip out) up against some really competitive Europeans. I didn't expect a win, did you?
                              Philip had some warmup issues at the Olympics if I recall.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by vineyridge View Post
                                Benchmarks are useful things when money is involved. There could be a benchmark for the dressage phase--69%; for xc--fewer than 10 total penalties; and stadium--no more than 8 pp. Unless a horse and rider combination meet the benchmarks HERE at the level involved at least twice, they don't get USET funding for trips abroad.

                                Obviously the goal of XC should be double clear; the goal of dressage should be over 70% and the goal of stadium should also be double clear. There are a rather large number of riders at Boekelo who scored 69% in dressage which then gives them a fighting chance to move up with the other two phases. Without that 69%, though, perfect performance the rest of the way will, in 98% of the cases, keep them far from the podium.

                                The USET could identify promising pairs and help with their training HERE. The benchmarks could and should be lower for training assistance HERE.
                                All of this. Particularly the last paragraph. Going to a new, more competitive locale at great expense when a pair has yet to prove their reliability at home is a waste. More help here, then benchmarks to ensure we'll be in the mix abroad.
                                "With mirth and laughter, let old wrinkles come" (Shakespeare).

                                Comment


                                • #76
                                  Originally posted by lmlacross View Post
                                  All of this. Particularly the last paragraph. Going to a new, more competitive locale at great expense when a pair has yet to prove their reliability at home is a waste. More help here, then benchmarks to ensure we'll be in the mix abroad.


                                  I guess I missed it...how were these horses not reliable at this level??? compared to who was left off this list? Folks...you can't have it both ways....wanting new blood to get more experience or only sending our most competitive pairs abroad. These pairs are all well established here....what they are lacking is more international experience.
                                  ** Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip. ~Winston Churchill? **

                                  Comment


                                  • #77
                                    Originally posted by bornfreenowexpensive View Post
                                    I guess I missed it...how were these horses not reliable at this level??? compared to who was left off this list? Folks...you can't have it both ways....wanting new blood to get more experience or only sending our most competitive pairs abroad. These pairs are all well established here....what they are lacking is more international experience.
                                    My statement was a general one not aimed at any current recipient of the Boek. grant. I intended it to reflect my opinion of best practices with regard to the distribution of grant money by the NGB: IMO, more riders supported at the top levels available on our continent leads to more time spent in the tack competing rather than teaching/training leads to more viable international competitors.

                                    To address another of your questions, I would contend that it's not really relevant whether competitors are reliable when compared to those "left off [the] list," it's a matter of whether they're reliable when compared to those they'll be competing with. I don't see that any grievous omissions have been made here, it's just that i don't think $15,000 to go overseas is going to fix the larger problem.

                                    Many are of the opinion than simply sending our athletes to compete overseas more often will bring us the better results we seek. I'm not sure I have the perfect solution, but I'm a bit incredulous that frequent and costly transatlantic travel and competition by riders who only get to spend a fraction of their time training and competing top-level horses will be the magic bullet. The funding problem needs to be fixed further down the tree, and we need to be patient.
                                    "With mirth and laughter, let old wrinkles come" (Shakespeare).

                                    Comment


                                    • #78
                                      Originally posted by bornfreenowexpensive View Post
                                      I guess I disagree. I think we sent the right horses and their results are fine. This was a 3*. We didn't send out best 3* horses. We sent horses who we think will be some of our best 4* horses in the near future. Competing abroad had a lot of logistics that competing from home does not have. Our riders and horses need more experience flying and competing than our European counterparts. And each of these horses and riders DID already prove they are worth the investment.

                                      I don't give a rat's a$$ if we win at the 3* level. I want to see us win and be competitive at WEG in 2 years....and therefore want as many of our good young horses and riders getting experience flying and putting together a competition.

                                      If this same group was flown over again next year with poor results...then I might bitch and groan a bit more. But a horse that will be competitive in 2 years may not be as competitive this year. What I'm sure the team and selectors are focusing on is how did they handle this stress...and what do we need to focus on for each pair.

                                      I guess I'm just not going too get to worked up over it now.


                                      Absolutely exactly the way I feel. This is not something to worry about. Our problem is experienced horses and there is no other way to gain experience for our horses that to test a little and this was a test. Don't forget we have Colleen and Buck at Pau and holy cow Fair Hill looks enormous this year.
                                      Proud & Permanent Student Of The Long Road
                                      Read me: EN (http://eventingnation.com/author/annemarch/) and HJU (http://horsejunkiesunited.com/author/holly-covey/)

                                      Comment


                                      • #79
                                        Whether she applied or not for the Land Rover grants and/or the Boekelo Team, the horse I'd have liked to see there is Can't Fire Me. He's young, relatively inexperienced, and does dynamite dressage when judged here. He's one who needs the International experience so his dressage can be judged against the best. This is a horse that the USEF should have as a top priority for the future.

                                        Of course, I'm also very partial to grey OTTBs and Becky Holder. I think she and Kim Severson are possibly the only US based riders who can be consistently competitive in International eventing dressage as it is now.

                                        Edited to add: And Allison consistently and quite a few of the others on a very good day.
                                        Last edited by vineyridge; Oct. 15, 2012, 10:19 AM.
                                        "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
                                        Thread killer Extraordinaire

                                        Comment


                                        • #80
                                          People and horses have to travel overseas to learn how they adapt to jet lag, foods, water/drink, temp changes, languages, procedures, etc. It wasn't that long ago that I didn't know about Becky Holder so there always "who dats" out there. Also there a lot of talented up and comers who can benefit from international experience. Whether they make the team or end up training the next generation.

                                          A suggestion, in case it isn't done already, is to lease a yard in GB or on the continent. This will provide a base for US, and maybe Canadian, riders to stay for a month or so in preparation for destination events. Could also be a base for riders to spend 6 months to a year for intensive overseas training. Riders with private or self funding could pay a "small fee" to stay there.
                                          "Never do anything that you have to explain twice to the paramedics."
                                          Courtesy my cousin Tim

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X