• 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

Olympian Blyth Tait Downgraded to Pre-Novice by FEI

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

  • #61
    most professional riders do not compete in this sport to earn money. They are just lucky that many can now make a living in the sport....but they compete and are event riders first and foremost because the love the sport. What you and I are posting JP60 is not that different.

    I have seen up close and personal now over the years how changes with the FEI have drastically changed the sport even at the lowest of levels. It has changed the type of courses we now see at novice and training level. It has changed the cost of an event at all levels. Basically...my point is the ripple effect of a rule like this can and often does have an effect that we can not always predict at all levels.

    So WE as in all of eventing are also a part of the FEI. So as long as our sport is a part of the FEI....then we should voice our concerns. We can pressure the FEI to make changes. We have to push our own voices and support our representatives there....and speak with what will be heard. I'm not willing to just give up without a fight nor am I willing to abandon the USEA or USEF or even the FEI. I'm willing to work a bit to try and improve them all. I DO like that my sport is a part of the Olympics and WEG...I do like to cheer on my team....and I want to see the sport at all levels improve and grow. So I see a dumb rule....I'm going to voice my opinion and try and get that rule changed. The basic motivation for the rule may not be something I competely disagree with...but I don't like the rule as currently drafted and do think something can be done about it. And with riders like Gina and Blyth being affected....likely something will be done if we continue to support our side and give them the motivation and power to fight for a change.
    ** 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


    • #62
      Originally posted by bornfreenowexpensive View Post
      most professional riders do not compete in this sport to earn money. They are just lucky that many can now make a living in the sport....but they compete and are event riders first and foremost because the love the sport. What you and I are posting JP60 is not that different.
      In principle I agree, in the details we differ, but then differences are good for it adds color. I think there are some that would feel Eventing would be better served not being a part of FEI while still retaining the National Organizations that help structure and guide the sport. Those learned folks I agree with as well. Our voices will not change a whit the decisions of the FEI and neither will second tier riders (FEI's view, not mine).

      In one point I disagree. A professional does compete in the sport to make money. I did not specify, because clearly they are not going to make tons from prize money. They compete to gain a name, experience, and status which translates into money. The love of the sport is a given otherwise they'd be driving cars or racing sailboats. I could be the best trainer in the world, I could have been jumping 5' log piles safely, but if I'm an unknown I wont get many students, customers at clinics, sponsors, or owners willing to have me train horses or ride them in competition. Professionals compete to make money to do what they do. A variation of Publish or Perish. Their boss is now the FEI and if they want to stay in the public eye, if they want to continue income then they will dance the FEI tune.

      I too love this sport and compete for the love of it. I too am a professional, but in programming. Yet the same applies for I have to dance to the tune of my boss if I want to continue in my passion. At the moment I am really unhappy in my job, and though I have an ultimate choice to change, at 30+ years in the industry the options are limited. I see this with the FEI and professional riders and that now makes me sad. I cannot support an organization that makes decisions affecting my sport and I have not even the power to vote against them. I can and will support professionals in the best way I can, go to clinics, buy what the sponsor, cheer them on at events either I attend or are not affiliated with the FEI.

      (My voice to the FEI is dollars. In my case the lack there of and if more people spoke, you may get change. I can go to Pine Top and watch the best riders on an Advanced course, watch amazing dressage and not pay a dime (or be happy to pay a visitor fee or volunteer, which I do). I do not need the FEI for that and if the USEF/USEA got some back bone maybe they would figure out how to get more 4* locations in the US and tell the FEI to shove their MERS and their non-compete rules up their ...own rulebook).

      Comment


      • #63
        The FEI has long time professional staff who have, with I'm sure, the concurrence of the Eventing Committee made recommendations for changes which were not sent to the General Assembly--dropping the dressage coefficient was one such proposed change.

        The Eventing Committee is composed of only six people. Robert Kellerhouse is one, and Clayton Fredericks is (or was) the athlete representative on the committee. Both gentlemen have connections to North American now. Another member of the executive committee is an Australian. Then there is one Brit. The Chairman is an Italian, and there is also one French member.

        All of these people, save the Chairman, are from the big eventing nations. At least three of them are from countries which do not currently have a plethora of FEI events available for their riders.

        It makes one wonder where all the pressure for change is coming from. I simply cannot fathom why so many drastic changes have been implemented recently when all the NFs represented on the committee went on record last year as opposed to the downgrading of the CCI.

        It looks to me as if the ongoing pressure is coming from outside the eventing community.

        One does wish that the FEI were far more transparent in its politics than it is. By the time changes are recommended to the General Assembly, they are a foregone conclusion.

        A bit OT, but HSBC has bailed from the FEI.

        Another OT, but interesting bit, is that the IOC is sitting on 558 million dollars.
        "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
        Thread killer Extraordinaire

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by JP60 View Post
          In principle I agree, in the details we differ, but then differences are good for it adds color. I think there are some that would feel Eventing would be better served not being a part of FEI while still retaining the National Organizations that help structure and guide the sport. Those learned folks I agree with as well. Our voices will not change a whit the decisions of the FEI and neither will second tier riders (FEI's view, not mine).

          In one point I disagree. A professional does compete in the sport to make money. I did not specify, because clearly they are not going to make tons from prize money. They compete to gain a name, experience, and status which translates into money. The love of the sport is a given otherwise they'd be driving cars or racing sailboats. I could be the best trainer in the world, I could have been jumping 5' log piles safely, but if I'm an unknown I wont get many students, customers at clinics, sponsors, or owners willing to have me train horses or ride them in competition. Professionals compete to make money to do what they do. A variation of Publish or Perish. Their boss is now the FEI and if they want to stay in the public eye, if they want to continue income then they will dance the FEI tune.

          I too love this sport and compete for the love of it. I too am a professional, but in programming. Yet the same applies for I have to dance to the tune of my boss if I want to continue in my passion. At the moment I am really unhappy in my job, and though I have an ultimate choice to change, at 30+ years in the industry the options are limited. I see this with the FEI and professional riders and that now makes me sad. I cannot support an organization that makes decisions affecting my sport and I have not even the power to vote against them. I can and will support professionals in the best way I can, go to clinics, buy what the sponsor, cheer them on at events either I attend or are not affiliated with the FEI.

          (My voice to the FEI is dollars. In my case the lack there of and if more people spoke, you may get change. I can go to Pine Top and watch the best riders on an Advanced course, watch amazing dressage and not pay a dime (or be happy to pay a visitor fee or volunteer, which I do). I do not need the FEI for that and if the USEF/USEA got some back bone maybe they would figure out how to get more 4* locations in the US and tell the FEI to shove their MERS and their non-compete rules up their ...own rulebook).

          I agree...competing successfully at the FEI levels is nothing more than a business card/publicity for the rider. It puts value in the ancillary products. There in lies the money/living.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by poltroon View Post
            That Gina Miles, Olympic Silver Medalist, is not qualified to run because she's had an injured horse is amusing/annoying. But, much more alarmingly, I bet if you looked at her record with McKinleigh, who was her only upper level horse, and who was campaigned from her California base, that she would not have gotten enough MERs to run him at the competitions that she did during his career, and she probably never would have been able to make the team.
            The qualification path for a horse/rider together is still open, all the way from lowest level to top level. Categories etc have NO bearing on that at all. This has caused a lot of confusion, because it's not very well-worded. But if Gina had another McKinlaigh she could qualify and advance up the levels just as before.

            I wrote this piece which makes it a bit clearer, I hope:
            http://e-venting.co.uk/?p=200

            Blyth's case is very unusual, of course. I really am not sure that he does need to go back down to BE100 level, I think that it's been totally confused. He got 3 MERs at 2* last year. Plus, BE100 does not qualify one for anything under FEI rules, it's far below their radar, surely?! So, it makes no sense to imply that he would have to take a new 4* ride, say, back down to BE100.
            I think that the fact that he took 2 rides to Tweseldown last weekend, one a greenie and one new one, and ran them both at BE100 (Open in the case of the more experienced new one) has perhaps been misinterpreted... no? Maybe it was due to time constraints? Maybe he just wanted a nice easy run round a small course on a new ride? I don't think he HAD to run at that level.

            By the way, we're still waiting to hear from the FEI about their decisions after receiving the Event Riders Association petition regarding MERs...

            Comment


            • #66
              The reduced to BE100 is not correct. The lowest a rider would have to drop is to the 1* level if they have their national qualifications to run at that level. But the number of MERs to become a catorgized rider is quite high (even moreso after this year). And without a catorgization, if a rider gets the ride on a new horse, they have to redo the qualifications.

              To me, the issue IS about reining in the FEI from extending its reach and impact. The number of MERs are set too high, especially for the lower level catagorziation IMO (I don't really have much issue with setting it high for a 4* or even 3*--as I'm not sure I see the need to preserve catch riding at those levels other than for the extreme exception)...and I would rather NOT have the FEI dictating these qualifictions. I do not believe rules can impose or teach horsemanship....so burdensome qualification systems like this I believe are flawed from the start.
              Last edited by bornfreenowexpensive; Mar. 15, 2013, 01:20 PM.
              ** 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
                I don't think Tina Cook is qualified for 4* either http://www.equestrianteamgbr.co.uk/r...ider=tina-cook so the sooner this is sorted out, the better for eventing.
                "Good young horses are bred, but good advanced horses are trained" Sam Griffiths

                Comment


                • #68
                  Kim Seversen will not be qualified at for 4* either as of 2014.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by asterix View Post
                    Right, and pre-novice is like training. Still kind of a giant jump back for an Olympic veteran.
                    Gold medal Olympian, 2x World Champion.
                    When blood is the beverage of choice, the sharpest fangs feed first.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Eventingjunkie View Post
                      Kim Seversen will not be qualified at for 4* either as of 2014.
                      True but she is for the 3* level so all this means is after 2014, if she got a new 4* horse, she would have run I think one CIC3* and one CCI3* before tackling a 4* with that new horse. It doesn't affect her ability to take a horse she has produced and qualified to the 4*. A bit of a pain but not horrific. The issue is more riders like Blyth who are either uncatogorized or a catorgory D. They would have to run that new 3* or 4* horse all the way back at the 1* level and qualify them back up.

                      I could be wrong...but that was how I read it. It will not affect riders who produce a horse up the levels but it will have some affects. My dislike of the rule....is a general dislike of the FEI extending its reach and a general dislike of rules attempting to legislate good horsemanship. I don't think either thing is good or will work as intended.
                      ** 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


                      • #71
                        Clearly clarification about the qualification paths is needed. No one seems entirely sure how exactly the MERs work in specific instances. I think a bigger issue is the removal of national HTs from the upper level qualifications. An experienced advanced pair that has never done an FEI event would have to drop back to the 1* level to qualify for a 3*. That seems more ridiculous than making a new partnership drop down, to me anyway.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by bornfreenowexpensive View Post
                          True but she is for the 3* level so all this means is after 2014, if she got a new 4* horse, she would have run I think one CIC3* and one CCI3* before tackling a 4* with that new horse. It doesn't affect her ability to take a horse she has produced and qualified to the 4*. A bit of a pain but not horrific. The issue is more riders like Blyth who are either uncatogorized or a catorgory D. They would have to run that new 3* or 4* horse all the way back at the 1* level and qualify them back up.

                          I could be wrong...but that was how I read it. It will not affect riders who produce a horse up the levels but it will have some affects. My dislike of the rule....is a general dislike of the FEI extending its reach and a general dislike of rules attempting to legislate good horsemanship. I don't think either thing is good or will work as intended.
                          This is absolutely right. And we shouldn't forget that this is what most riders would do anyway! WFP got the ride on a 3* new horse, Chilli Morning, last year. WFP is one of the most highly qualified Category A riders in the world, his number of MERs is through the roof, obviously, but he took the horse back to 2* level anyway. 99.9% of good horsemen and horsewomen don't need policing! The ones coming up who are delusional (when their results genuinely scream 'needs more experience!') are a different kettle of fish...
                          Catch rides at top level, going straight out round a 4* course on a horse, have not been allowed for some time. Of course it was the stuff that legends were made of when Toddy did it with Horton Point and also with The Irishman, but what other riders could do it?!
                          I think the argument is that 1* is too small for most horses with 3* and 4* experience. Plus, it's not fair at all on the genuine 1* competitors.
                          Let's all pray that the FEI sees sense on this. Waiting to hear...

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by kerilli View Post
                            WFP got the ride on a 3* new horse, Chilli Morning, last year. WFP is one of the most highly qualified Category A riders in the world, his number of MERs is through the roof, obviously, but he took the horse back to 2* level anyway.
                            Clarification: Chilli Morning had already completed Burghley clear with Nick Gauntlett in 2011. WFP took him to a CCI** in May and two weeks later, a CCI***.
                            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


                            • #74
                              While it is logical for a new combination of 4 star horse and non catagorized rider, with 4 star experience, to run a CCI 1 star and a couple of A HTs as a systems check before heading out at a 4 star, is it also logical that the pair must do all the mandatory 1 stars, then all the mandatory 2 stars and all the mandatory 3 stars before a 4 star run? At considerable monetary cost!

                              What if the rider's FEI experience, ( categorized rides), are heavily in the 3 star and 4 star levels? What if neither horse or rider has ever had a fault at those levels? Are they still to be considered incompetent at those levels?

                              Easy, peasy if you live in Germany, where every competition above P is an FEI competition and costs less than our HTs to enter, not so if you live here!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X