• 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.



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

Rolex entries are up!

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by SLR View Post
    Not to put words in JP60's mouth. He's perfectly capable of explaining himself, but what I took it to mean is that Sinead was told last year not to run Rolex because she was a shoo in for the team and should save the horse for the Olympics. Well, that didn't happen and now she's being told to not run Rolex again for a chance at Pau. Perhaps she has more faith in DOC, and the selectors this time around.
    Hopefully the lack of transparency that surrounded the team in the recent past has changed. Time will tell.
    I think these sorts of discussions/threads are really important and good for the sport. That said, I do think we need to make efforts to try and fairly represent the facts and try not to reach conclusions based on suppositions. The reality is that, even under a more transparent process, the general eventing public won't have access to all the details, nor will they be present at discussions between the team, riders, vets, owners, etc.

    Back in a COTH blog from June 2012, Sinead stated: At the beginning of the season I was told, thankfully, by the selectors that it wasn’t necessary for Tate and I to compete at a CCI competition, but that we would need to hold our form at the CIC level all spring. This was to give Tate the best chance to be fit mentally and physically for the Games.

    It seems to be an oft repeated statement that Sinead was told she was a 'shoo in' for the team in 2012. But I've never heard that she has confirmed that version. And the above actually suggests otherwise. And frankly, even if those were the actual words uttered, it must be put in context. It was early 2012, and if the team had been named in January or February of 2012, she probably would have been on the team. That isn't to say, however, that there weren't lots of other horses vying for spots. I can think of a few horses that would have been very legitimate contenders if their seasons had gone a bit differently.

    Instead, the Team actually did a great thing, imo, and gave her the flexibility to build a program that suited her horse and the ultimate end goal:

    So this year, when I went to the Captain and asked, “OK, so if I’m not going to Rolex (which I know how to prepare for) what do you think I should do for my season?” it shocked me a little when he responded, “Do whatever you need to do to prepare you and your horse to perform your best at the biggest competition of your life.”

    Now, perhaps the Team could have provided more support or advice through that process. I don't know. But I don't think Sinead was left off the Team because she didn't run Rolex, or because she headed to England earlier. I just don't think that is a fair assessment.

    As for this year, particularly with a horse with substantial upper level miles, if the goal is WEG 2014, why would you waste his legs on Rolex when Pau (or another French event) will provide the best preparation? Particularly a horse like Tate who hasn't, historically, been heavily competed.


    • #42
      Originally posted by JP60 View Post
      I honest to goodness think this nationalism is doing more to negatively impact this sport then even the FEI. 99% of the time this sport about individuals, not teams, not even really country. Do WE, as a country, gain anything if the USA gets gold at the Olympics. Do we run around our local shows going USA USA USA or do we maybe more go "Wow, did you see Mary King's ride at WEG?" (traitor. You are Banished from Eventing.). If we talk, we talk about the best from any country, but we talk about them mainly because we see them.

      Sinead Halpin is not going to run at Rolex. I read her blog, I understood (in principle) the decision, but that just pissed me off. She got dumped by the Selection Committee, took her horse, trained the dickens out of both and then put her name on the tip of every tongue, both sides of the pond. I respected that, because it was the example of doing what you, the rider wants and can do. Now, as I understand, her horse is not injured, he in no way would be harmed running Rolex, but I now don't get to see one of my favorite combinations, because of some damn potential for a piece of metal that has little impact on this sport, with no guarantee she'll run in the Olympics or WEG. A bird in the hand in this case...

      We should fill Rolex up to overflowing. We should have it so there is a reason to run a second one. Sinead and others skipping Rolex should tell DOC, thanks, but not again (didn't she get told to not do some events to "save" herself for the Olympics?). Rolex should be our Daytona, our Superbowl, our Wold Series. If what DOC is doing is true, he cheapens Eventing in the US. We should become more vocal in demanding more challenging courses here in the states and just stop trying to compete with Europe. Its like everyone wants to play at the Rich guy's mansion, because ours is not as fancy or nice. Eventing does not need WEG or the Olympics, but US Eventing does need Rolex and more.

      I have to agree about the part where they told her not to run...then she got left high and dry. I also think if she can Rolex again, she has a good chance of winning. After showing what she can do overseas, I don't think that team has much left to prove. However, that being said I support Sinead %100 and I hope she has a great year. I will be attending Rolex this year regardless with the same amount of excitement as ever!
      Boss Mare Eventing Blog


      • #43
        Originally posted by snoopy View Post
        Didn't they run a prelim 3 day as well way back when?
        I think Sylvester did the Prelim 3 Day
        Boss Mare Eventing Blog


        • #44
          Originally posted by snoopy View Post
          Didn't they run a prelim 3 day as well way back when?
          Yes. Boy that would be nice to have back. But that is just because then I'd have a chance lol


          • #45
            Starfish, I agree to a point, but what is said or written for public consumption may not be the whole story. And I don't understand your point that they gave her the flexibility to reach her ultimate goal. Her goal was the Olympics in 2012.
            Of course its all just supposition, because we were not privy to the conversations. And in the end probably doesn't matter. There have been many before her who were burned when they banged their head against the glass ceiling. Its always right to do what is best for yourself and your horse, and then you can look back with a clean heart, and less regrets.


            • #46
              Originally posted by SLR View Post
              Starfish, I agree to a point, but what is said or written for public consumption may not be the whole story.

              Well, of course. But I don't think its fair to be reaching conclusions based on supposition about what was actually said. Even if she WAS told that she was a 'shoo in' for the Team, that is a statement made at that particular moment of time. It is obviously accompanied by the usual qualifications like...provided the horse is sound, provided the horse maintains its form and provided that there aren't other, stronger candidates.

              Of course, in my view, the real issue that people have with the decision to not select Sinead/Tate, is less about running Rolex or being told she was a 'shoo in' and more about the selection of Ringwood Magister and, to a lesser extent, Twizzel.

              Originally posted by SLR View Post
              And I don't understand your point that they gave her the flexibility to reach her ultimate goal. Her goal was the Olympics in 2012.

              The Team didn't dictate to her that she had to follow a certain path. They allowed her the freedom and flexibility to design her own program. Now, ultimately, the plan was not successful in terms of getting on the Team but I don't think that was because they offered her the flexibility. I think that a more flexible approach should be encouraged as not every horse/rider needs the same prep before a big event.
              Last edited by starfish; Mar. 21, 2013, 06:30 PM.


              • #47
                I don't think anyone should run Rolex if they don't think it is in there best interest but as a spectator I am a little concerned. Is this usual? I don't recall their being so few entries a month out the last two years and entries must be in within the week correct? Just wondering as I have only been the last two years so not sure what is the norm.
                Last edited by bizbachfan; Mar. 22, 2013, 08:09 AM. Reason: sp


                • #48
                  Originally posted by bizbachfan View Post
                  I don't think anyone should run Rolex if they don't think it is in their best interest but as a spectator I am a little concerned. Is this usual? I don't recall their being so few entries a month out the last two years and entries must be in within the week correct? Just wondering as I have only been the last two years so not sure what is the norm.
                  You don't need to be concerned yet. There are still a number of horses aimed at Rolex who are not yet on the entry list.


                  • #49
                    The general tone shown before and after the Olympics was that in not doing certain shows, consideration would be given to the Olympics, yet later she was not picked over a lesser experienced rider (with in theory better dressage). It was a lousy system and perhaps still is. My view there is we do not need teams in Eventing. The Olympic *team* the WEG *team*, even the Pan Am *team* provides an opportunity for division, angst, and favoritism. The best *team* we fielded was at Burghley because it was not a forced, tightly controlled process, it was great riders working together, on their own, to go beyond what they were as individuals. if we want national pride, then field as many Americans at international shows and begin building them up. Teams benefit the few, always.

                    As to my second thought regarding Sinead, I in no way impinge on her care for Tate, her Horsemanship, or her character. When I read her blog she said this...

                    Tate looked fantastic in his clinical evaluation, showing no sensitivity to flexions and also looking great (and wild) on a circle. During the second part of evaluations, Dr. Revenaugh found a weakened area in one of Tate’s scans. This was very surprising because Tate was as close to perfect as you can get in a clinical exam.

                    Following the exam, Coach O’Connor, Dr. Revenaugh, Dr. Furlong and I had a good chat about moving forward. With the ultimate goal being the WEG in Normandy in August 2014, we decided that we should spend the next few months strengthening this weakness. Our original plan of Rolex this spring seems an unnecessary risk if it’s going to compromise the horse or the big picture plan with Team USA.
                    her first comment does not match the decision of the second.

                    (1) Had Sinead not been a part of the "team" involved with all this intensive scanning she may have never found a weak spot, thus without team involvement would have run at Rolex and Tate would have either been fine, or showed off, just like so many of us Riders that don't make decisions based on a team, but on what we have. For all we know, Tate may have had this "weak" spot as far back as Burghley.

                    (2) If it is going to compromise the horse, without a doubt you pull them out. If he had an injury that would compromise his ability to compete, would injure him self with no other consideration, don't go. That is not what she said. She said "or" in regards to a big picture and changes the equation.

                    What I got from that was (1) Tate is not in anyway unable to run, but is being held back to run at Pau (2) Decision are being made with the consideration of a team that does not exist so has no bearing on the moment other then possibilities, "If you want to run WEG you better do this".

                    I never, ever want to see a rider/horse team go just because I want to see them at some Event. I fully support the idea that it is first the horse, then the rider in deciding to go and had this not been colored by "team" considerations I'd not make a peep. But it was, and maybe some wont go to Rolex, because they were told you better run at Pau. We, the fans, lose in one way because we don't get to see a Rolex of individual choice, but one shaped and colored by team considerations and future potentials that cannot be predicted.

                    So yes,I am disappointed that Tate wont be running at Rolex, I understand that Sinead made a call with two vets and a "couch" telling her to look at the big picture, and I am grateful she is the kind of person who will make a tough call for the sake of a horse. I wont back away from my feelings that this sport does not benefit from a structured team approach.


                    • #50
                      JP60--I know he's put on some weight, but a "couch?"


                      • #51
                        Originally posted by cindywilson View Post
                        JP60--I know he's put on some weight, but a "couch?"
                        Cindy....you owe me a new MAC!!!! Bloody Brilliant comment!


                        • #52
                          Originally posted by 2ndyrgal View Post
                          Watching MK last year was special, not because of her credentials, but because they were both homebreds she made up herself. And even if they'd been made superstars, 1-2 is pretty impressive.
                          Fernhill Urco is not a homebred.

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


                          • #53
                            Originally posted by cindywilson View Post
                            JP60--I know he's put on some weight, but a "couch?"
                            Okay I deserved that one. Spell check said it was okay, where was my grammar check Ah, in my head, turned off.


                            • #54
                              Originally posted by JP60 View Post
                              I honest to goodness think this nationalism is doing more to negatively impact this sport then even the FEI. 99% of the time this sport about individuals, not teams, not even really country. [...]
                              I so totally agree with that!


                              • #55
                                Snoopy, that was what I was thinking. Back in the long format days, they ran a Prelim 3-day (don't know if there was an Int. 3-day as well).

                                Why not add a long format Prelim. Talk about drawing entries!
                                Home of Sea Accounts xx
                                AHS/HV, ATA, GOV, RPSI, JC, AQHA, APHA, APtHA
                                "LIKE" www.facebook.com/SeaAccounts


                                • #56
                                  Originally posted by cyriz's mom View Post
                                  Why not add a long format Prelim. Talk about drawing entries!
                                  Sad to say it wouldn't. In the muck and mire of FEI qualifications a long format prelim serves no purpose. Unless you don't mind blowing the cash and possible extra wear and tear on your horse it only serves as a NQR.....


                                  • #57
                                    A LF Prelim DOES serve a purpose -- for those who don't want to give money to FEI and those who want to run a full format event. Not everyone in eventing land wants to give money to the Princess. However, I will agree that there has been a problem with entries at Prelim -- Training and lower, people enter. At Prelim, the crowd thins. But I think at least part of this is due to the waning support for our National levels and the pressure to pay up and run FEI levels (which are just about indistinguishable to me in execution). Clients, students, and our fellow riders will not make the long format their goal unless (a) they go to one and see how awesome they are [heh, that's how I got the fever] or (b) their mentors and peers encourage participation.
                                    Life doesn't have perfect footing.

                                    Bloggily entertain yourself with our adventures (and disasters):
                                    We Are Flying Solo


                                    • #58
                                      You don't think riding in the Rolex Prelim Three-Day would draw entries? It'd be a goal/destination event for me...

                                      ... How fun to ride at AND watch rolex
                                      Yes, I ride a pony. No, he would not be ideal for your child. No, he is not a re-sale project...


                                      • #59
                                        I agree that they should consider running a 3* or Advanced at Rolex to get the entries up. I remember when I first went to Rolex (the mid-90's I think) they had horses running all day. It was great for the spectators (and vendors, etc.) Now it always seems like there are long breaks and the day starts mid-morning and ends in the mid-afternoon. It's still good--but I really enjoyed when they had a 3* level too. I also liked that you could watch some stadium on Sunday morning (they would do the 3* I think). Those of us with a long drive liked to watch that group go and then get on the road. Now, we usually just end up leaving on Sunday a.m. because the show jumping doesn't start until 1 or so.


                                        • #60
                                          Considering there is only 1 LF Prelim left (gods bless Mary Fike and MSEDA!), I think a spring one would be fantastic. Like others said, not everyone wants to run FEI or go higher than Prelim. They have the facility, minimal investment would need to be done imo... why not? Would the addition of an advanced HT running that day be of benefit to the calendar... to those perhaps aimed at Bromont or Jersey Fresh as a "last run"?

                                          As slp2 said, I remember the day being really long... especially for those of us who wanted to watch some Steeplechase and horses leaving off an Phase A. The day was FULL! I haven't been in a few years mostly because I'd only be going down for XC and with it being such a shortened day, it didn't seem worth the trip (as sad as that is to say). I'd like to go this year but the decision will be made probably last minute and yes, the length of the day will be a factor.
                                          "Of course it's hard. It's supposed to be hard. It's the Hard that makes it great."

                                          "Get up... Get out... Get Drunk. Repeat as needed." -- Spike