Pages

Thursday, May 19, 2016

Death Knell for Modern Eventing

Every time I open my mouth about eventing, I get bombarded with angry emotional tirades by people I don't even know (who frequently don't actually event, but are strangely emotionally attached to it) and every time, I swear I'll never do it again. But proving yet again that I might not be the smartest person on the internet, here I go.
the pinnacle of my "eventing"
I assume you all heard about the tragic passing of both an event rider and a horse in unrelated incidents at a US-based 3* last weekend. I'm not here to sit in judgement on specific incidents--by all accounts, the world is now short one amazing woman and a completely irreplaceable animal. There are a lot of articles circulating the internet about them right now--I think the best is this one, by a young woman who was deeply impacted by Phillipa.

No one with any sense is saying that either the rider or the horse was at fault and a lot of people with a lot of sense are fighting about how to fix the obvious and glaring problems. I don't have the answers and I'm definitely not here to chair a wholly-unqualified mob commission from my seat on the internet. Suffice to say, if you think you have the answers to fix a problem we can't quantify at this point, I also think you are an idiot.

That aside.

Eventing is digging it's own grave at an incredible rate right now. I've never evented above beginner novice and at this point in my life, it's unlikely to ever progress beyond that point. I cannot speak to what happens on course and that's not what this is about. I'm talking about the business model the USEA and PRO and modern American eventers have worked so hard to create. From a business perspective, this model is completely unsustainable.

Let's face it--eventing is the grass roots, common-man, Olympic-dreams sport in the way a pay-to-play discipline like show jumping or dressage can never be. International show jumping is populated with celebrities and billionaires. Want to go to the Olympics? Just drop 15mil on the literal nicest horse in the world, hire the best coach in the world, build the best facility in the world, and the competition will come to you. It's somewhat the same in dressage--all y'all rocking those $90 kastel sunshirts--do you know who Charlotte Jorst is? Facsinating story there.
good thing they're nice shirts

Eventing is the only FEI discipline in which a starry-eyed girl can buy a horse off the track for a few hundred dollars and make it to the elite upper levels. That is a beautiful thing, in a lot of ways.

But you know what it's not? A business model. That's why at the USEA convention, there are whole seminars on convincing rich people to be "owners" of upper level horses and allowing the real athletes to ride them. Of course, here's the thing--while a few people certainly own horses because they love horses and they love the sport and their version of collecting Breyer models is owning 7 horses at Rolex, that pool of people is very, VERY small.

For everyone else, they need to get something out of it. Obviously, eventing is a lot more dangerous than show jumping or dressage and requires a pretty specific personality type and a skill set that cannot be bought. That rules out most rich people who can afford to self-finance an international competition schedule. They themselves cannot compete at the top levels.

Ok, well what about event horses as an investment? I mean, Doug Payne sold Running Order and another horse (sob not over it) to not-figuratively buy the farm. I don't know or care how much money changed hands, but you'll notice even WFP hasn't taken that horse to a 4* since then. Of course he did almost metaphorically buy the farm last year, so who knows how that figures in.

What I'm getting at is this: according to this study commissioned by the FEI, one of the biggest indicators for a rotational fall (which is how people and horses die) is the age of the horse--meaning the Marilyn Little school of "ram em and jam em up the levels for a quick resale" is literally punching your ticket for a scary ass fall and if William Fox Pitt can't take a made 4* horse to a 4* event, well, then there really isn't a resale market for a 4* horse. Period. Eventing takes trust and a relationship between horse and rider and you can't buy that. Michael Jung makes his own--wonder why?

So essentially, an upper level event horse is rapidly becoming a dud as an investment. No matter how many times Visa tells you something is priceless, what that means in real terms is that it has no value. Can't sell it.

And if you can't sell it, you can't insure it. Insurance is a business and it runs on actuaries putting real values on things and then betting that the thing won't just fucking die at an event. Which they are doing. Right now.

Well that leaves an interesting conundrum, doesn't it? What's the incentive to own an un-saleable, un-insurable so-called "investment" in a high-risk sport?

There isn't one.

That leaves two options:

1) The moneybags would-be owners walk away from the sport--it drops out of the Olympics and off the public radar. Professionals struggle harder than ever to make it, course design naturally degenerates to the scary-ass stuff they jumped in olden times because there's no money to pay designers and build fancy fences and so on.

2) The sport makes serious changes in terms of safety and accessibility so that the Olympic buy-a-medal program remains a viable option. The risk is greatly reduced, the prices of horses jump up another few notches, the ability of the girl-on-her-ottb to make it to the top becomes less than zero. The purpose-bred $$$$$$$ horse dominates, the sport professionalizes to the point of being unrecognizable, and the Wellington eventing showcase is your new feature 4*. The sport you think you love no longer exists.

There are some appealing things about option 1--it's something Denny Emerson and Jimmy Wofford seem to advocate for, and obviously they've been around a while. There are some horse friendly outcomes in this and there is certainly an emotional appeal--you return the decision making to the horse people instead of handing it to the entertainers and accountants. There are also some really glaring drawbacks.

The first thing that comes to mind is simply the visibility--it's amazing how sports have to clean up when everyone starts looking. I think visibility is a huge part of horse and rider safety. If eventing were to drop off the map of the international scene, a lot of things could happen that otherwise wouldn't if there was more oversight. In addition, I really really don't understand all the people claiming that somehow going back to early-era eventing is a good idea. You think Vicarage Vee was terrifying? LOOK WHAT THEY USED TO DO. That's a nope. There is no question in my mind that with all it's drawbacks, the modern form of eventing is safer for horses and riders than whatever that horrifying bloodbath was.


So let's think about option 2. Money talks. Let's face it--dressage and showjumping, our equivalent international-level FEI-regulated events are essentially tests of which horse is the fanciest and most expensive, which means 99.999% of humanity cannot afford to compete. Obviously, horsemanship still plays in, but no one gets anywhere (on the international scene) with their OTTB. On the other hand, it's glamorous, fun to watch, and safe.

Moreover, there are also some horse friendly features to this model. Namely--horses stop dying in preventable ways. Public scrutiny is at a maximum and there is nowhere to hide a (metaphorical or real) body. The very real drawback is of course that when you can literally buy an Olympic medal, then you expect to and the welfare of the horse can be overlooked. Does this balance the increased scrutiny? Maybe?

Eventing is theoretically different because instead of being a fancy horse competition, it offered us the ability to test the sheer grit and heart of the horses and riders involved. The problem with that kind of test is failing it can mean death for horse and rider. We live in a safe, protected modern society that isn't comfortable with death and thinks that sacrificing good people and good horses on the altar of sport is disgusting bloodlust.

And frankly, I agree.

Modern eventing is going away. It cannot and should not survive.

What rises from it's ashes will be an interesting beast indeed.

43 comments:

  1. What a thoughtful and well written post. I can see this coming to fruition in the near future. Very well said!

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is the first time I've read a blog post about the state of eventing today that I've found myself nodding along to. You hit the nail on the head multiple times.

    It does make me sad - and I don't think it will go as far as you predict, because I do think there's still a lower-level business model - but I'd rather be nostalgic about the way something used to be than watch people and horses die again and again.

    ReplyDelete
  3. there's a lot to think about here, and coming at it from the perspective of a business model is really interesting - and perhaps getting to the essence of some of the issues surrounding eventing.

    i would challenge one point about the resale market tho: one of my coaches sold his 4* horse (at not enough to buy the farm bc the horse didn't have the right pedigree, but still an incredible sum) to a teenage girl from a wealthy family looking to make her bid to the upper levels. he sold his last 2* horse to.... a teenage girl a wealthy family looking to make her bid to the upper levels. in fact, he has sold pretty much all of his horses with maybe only one or two exceptions to some teenage girl from a wealthy family looking to make her bid to the upper levels. THAT is the middle market for most pros in the business of bringing horses up the levels until they sell.

    admittedly, it's not the highest echelons of the business - of which you're mostly speaking. but it's absolutely the middle ground market and what is sustaining many of the pros in my area. i'm not entirely sure what it implies for the sustainability of rich owners tho.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have to agree with Emma about the resale market - there are plenty of * and ** horses for sale out there (and people to buy them, either as upper-level prospects or as schoolmasters at lower levels), so there is most definitely a business model there. However, there just aren't that many 4* horses in the world - for example, there's only 78 in the US right now. Plus, you can't just buy a 4* horse and ride it at a 4* competition, you have to qualify in at least 3 3* competitions, and there are only four of those run in the US every year. So running a 4* isn't as easy as just going out and buying a made horse - unlike riding Grand Prix at a dressage competition, where there are no qualifiers. There are loads more GP jumpers and GP dressage horses in the world than there are 4* eventers, so between the qualifications required to compete, and the sheer number of horses available, it's no wonder the difference in the market.

      I suggest another option to 1 and 2, and that is for the lower-level riders, which as others have noted are the bulk of the sport, raise enough of a cry to change things. They really are the ones with the most to lose in this game. I would have hoped that the upper-level riders and course designers, along with the national and international organizations, would have banded together to help improve safety on course, but despite improvements that have been made (frangible pins, air vests, etc.), it's pretty clear that it's not enough.

      It's a very sad state for a sport that used to define me. Now, I'm just glad I'm not an eventer.

      Delete
    2. I agree and I disagree. There is absolutely a market for horses stepping down from the upper levels or being sold to young riders. Neither of those are really what I'm talking about though--in both cases, the horse will no longer do what it's supposedly best at, which is run at the 4* level. You take a GP jumper or dressage horse, and if you have the skills, you can reasonably expect to be back in the GP ring within the year. That's a marketable asset.

      If a 4* horse can't be sold as a 4* horse, then there really isn't a market for a 4* horse at a 4* price. There's a market to step him down, sure, but that's not the same.

      I know the qualifications are different for eventing and I know event horses compete less than dressage or event horses because the level of wear and tear is totally different. That said, even if we add a year or 18 months or whatever to the sale time to allow for the rider moving the horse back up, it's still not really happening in a substantive way. There is definitely a market for well started horses to be picked up by big riders and moved up--I don't know upper level eventing well enough to be an authority, but it seems pretty common to pick up a prelim/intermediate or even a young-ish advanced horse and move them up the levels. It's still not the same as the horse having an insurable sale value as a 4* horse.

      Delete
    3. Absolutely disagree. Grand Prix dressage horses are not easy to ride and I would never expect to be back at the GP level after just a year of acquiring even a really rideable one. Totilas is an excellent example of how money cannot buy success in the dressage ring. I don't think money can buy success in any ring.

      I think it's unfair to call dressage out on how expensive it is, especially given that I got my Gold medal in 4 shows that cost me maybe at most $200 each while if I wanted to go Advanced in eventing, I'd be spending about $800 per EVENT. All disciplines are expensive, period. Eventing is arguably harder to get to the upper levels because of how expensive it is to even qualify for those levels. At least in dressage you can just train at home until you're ready for GP and head out.

      Delete
    4. I appreciate your perspective, but we aren't really talking about the same thing here. Totilas is a great example of a confirmed GP horse basically being sold as a move up horse for for the world's most spoiled teenager/actually a stud for teen's step dad. While I assume Rath has a decent riding pedigree (I know very little about him), he was by no means an equal to Gal in the saddle. He was not and did not become a player on the international scene. I suspect he and moneybags mommy wanted him to be, but that's not what happened.

      As for the relative cost of shows, I didn't go there because this isn't about that. I'm talking about the base cost of an asset in a business model. We have multiple measurable assets (in the form of 4* horses) actively competing at the international level against the best in the eventing world that are simple, backyard, OTTBs. That is not and never will be a thing in dressage as we know it. Yes, Hilda Gurney and a few others took thoroughbreds to the Olympics "back in the day", but that's when 64 was an Olympic score. We are not ever going back to those days and I don't know anyone who would argue that we should.

      Delete
    5. Rath was still an FEI GP competitor- http://www.fei.org/bios/Person/10010055/Matthias_Alexander_RATH/3 isn't that your point, that someone could buy themselves a fancy horse and go be super competitive at the highest levels? And it's not true. He's no Gal, but he's not just a kid buying a fancy horse as a move up horse, he never dropped Totilas down a level. Sure it was a shit show, but that's my point- money doesn't buy results in dressage, just like money doesn't buy results in any discipline.

      My point about the entry fees is this: you might pay more upfront for a dressage horse because OTTBs do not tend to be as suitable for it, but in the long run, a GP dressage horse and an Advanced event horse will likely cost about the same amount of money, as the event horse will need to go to many more events to get to the highest level.

      I just think the point about money threw other disciplines under the bus unnecessarily.

      Delete
  4. Very thoughtful post! I think there is still plenty of lifeblood in the lower levels of eventing, Training/Prelim and lower. The 'grassroots' levels of the sport are still strong, and safe, and based on sheer numbers of competitors, I think the lower levels can and will continue on in the future. Lower level eventing is still a place where a scrappy girl and a scrappy, free horse can make a name for themselves. Upper Level eventing, however, has some serious, serious problems that I'm not sure it can recover from. You've made some very interesting points here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with this. I can't recall the actual percentage, but its a huge difference of registered USEA participants competing Training and below versus Prelim and up. Your post is very well written and some interesting points for sure, but I agree with Alli. In eventing, we almost function as two separate sports- lower level eventing and upper level eventing. Spirit is the same, but the rest... maybe not so much.

      Delete
    2. I can't find the exact statistic now, but it's something like 70% will never compete above Training level. Lower levels are the majority, for sure. And I agree with both of you - upper level eventing and lower level eventing are two completely different worlds. Painting it all with the same brush is a mistake.

      Delete
  5. Wow. That was the most cohesive, well-written post or article I have read on the state of eventing, in light of recent events.

    You really brought a fresh perspective to the table, with a tie-in to the business model of other upper-level sports, and nailed it on the head with how society now views loss of life in sport.

    I couldn't agree more with everything you wrote in today's post. Well done.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I evented, after many years of wanting very badly to event and finally making the dream come true, through Training. I was successful at the local level; I didn't win everything in sight, but I was in the ribbons more often than not. I ran a T3D. I contributed many volunteer hours, worked on a committee for my Area, and took the initiative in reviving and revising an educational program at my barn. I left the sport as a rider when my horse maxed out and i decided that I wanted to keep riding that horse more than I wanted to event right then an md there, but figured I'd get back to it some day.

    I left as a volunteer and supporter when it became clear to me that the community and organizations are not committed to making meaningful change to keep horses and riders safer at the upper levels. I still think that low-level eventing is as safe as a horse sport can reasonably be expected to be --- but I cannot in good conscience ignore the system and patterns overall.

    I get risk. Risk assessment and communications are part of my professional and personal lives/ that's how I know that nothing is 109% safe and also how I know that there is such a thing as an unacceptable level. I watched eventing for quite a few years to see if the sport that I loved and poured myself into would grasp that concept.

    It hasn't. It doesn't seem to want to. I hope I'm wrong, but all signs point to it being on another path.

    I'm out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha! That was supposed to be 100%. But I kind of like the rogue 9%.

      Delete
    2. The 9% definitely makes the point. ;-)

      Delete
  7. I honestly don't think money has anything to do with it. Maybe I'm naive in that, but I also don't think Show jumping is nearly as "pay to play" as you do.

    That being said, I'm glad I'm not an eventer. I don't think the USEA is doing a good job of things, and I don't pretend to have any answers on how to fix it. So basically I have a lot of "I don'ts" associated with eventing, because I'm not educated enough in the sport to talk much about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This isn't the USEA's purpose at all - they're a non-profit educational organization. National level eventing is under USEF rules and regs. International level eventing is under FEI.

      Delete
    2. I'm clear on the distinctions between the organizations, but PR and image are real things and if eventing is going to continue to insist it's one sport and one unit with one vision, it's going to continue to be tarred with one brush. What may not be USEA's responsibility is still its problem, you know?

      Delete
    3. Agree Lauren, I was a bit irked by the thought that all that's keeping us away from being GP show jumpers or dressage riders is money. I was on quite a budget and made it to GP with hard work. And I definitely don't think that all that's standing in the way of me jumping around a Grand Prix show jumping course is my budget :P

      Delete
    4. Hannah, USEA is the only organization I've really seen make a big push toward the importance of safety. They have done A LOT, but since they have the least power, they can't do it alone. It's fair to say that it's still their problem, but it's not fair to say they've done nothing and don't seem to care. That's not true at all. I think it's important that people know the difference, understand the structure, and know which organization they should be directing their feelings toward. You can get a lot more done if you're barking up the right tree.

      Delete
    5. That's certainly a fair point! (I do think at least some people feel that USEA is their only hope to actually be heard, which to me is even more damning re: USEF and FEI.)

      Delete
  8. Interesting thought process. I'm not an eventer and will likely never be. I do participate in endurance, which is also recognized by FEI and is 100% grass roots and filled with kill pen horses. What I find very interesting about what is going on is that the majority of people seem to be completely ok with the death rate as long as someone behind the scenes appears to be researching the issue. How many more deaths will occur while this research is going on?

    In the recent past endurance has come under the gun for a remarkably high death rate in one certain region of the world (not the US). There was a call to arms and the ending result was a suspension of that region from all competition until things got sorted out. They supposedly did and were given the green light only to cheat some more and have more horse deaths. So...they got suspended yet again and the WEG pulled from their region and moved elsewhere.

    But here in the US with eventing things seem to go on as scheduled without so much as a blip. People are told that things are being researched without nay actual evidence of that occuring and no time line as to when preliminary results should be expected. In the meantime, events continue on and horses and people die. Seems strange to me, but I am an outsider and not involved directly in this sport.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know literally nothing about endurance, so thank you for sharing your perspective.

      I've also been baffled by the "let's keep doing things this way and cross our fingers" mode of dealing with the current situation. But hey. I don't event and I don't pretend to understand those who do.

      Delete
    2. USEA actually covers the progress/state of their studies at the annual meeting. They're a non-profit, so it's very easy to obtain that kind of information by request.

      There have actually been a lot of changes in the past several years. Changes to rules about fence design (yes, even to tables like the one Philippa fell at). The introduction of frangible pins. The problem is that you can't just go around changing things willy-nilly. Cross country courses have tremendous expenses associated with them as far as building and materials, so you can't decide to build 10 different versions of every fence and use the trial and error method to determine what works. Sometimes we think we're making things better when actually we're making things worse, or we end up focusing on the wrong aspect and still get it wrong. That's why the research is so important. How can you possibly know that what you're doing is the right thing when you don't even have a clue what the actual effects might be. Unless of course you just want to make all XC courses Training level spec or below... but that's not actually a solution either.

      I think the people involved in eventing understand that this is not a simple, overnight kind of solution. Some people see that as indifference, but that's not really the case at all. At least not from this insider's perspective.

      Delete
  9. So, reading some of these comments have made me feel like a few more things need to be said here.

    - I don't think a lot of people realize that USEA is a non-profit educational organization and has zero rule making ability. USEF controls all of the rules and regulations in national level eventing, and FEI controls all the rules and regulations in international level eventing. USEA is 100% at their mercy, so pointing a finger at USEA is pointing it completely the wrong way. USEA has done more to try to help with safety (safety committees, studies, several forums, etc) than either of the other two organizations put together. They just don't have that much "pull" in the grand scheme of things.

    - Personally, I think eventing (and honestly all horse sports) would be better off if we weren't part of the Olympics. FEI has to bend over backwards to make the IOC happy, and the IOC has a totally different set of priorities than we do. Horse and Rider welfare are not on their list.

    - Going back to the long format #1 will never ever happen and #2 I agree with Aimee here - was NOT better or safer than it is now. In fact, if you look at the statistics there are actually LESS deaths and serious injuries now - we've been trending down even though participation is up. It is, however, WAY more publicized now than it used to be.

    - I do think it's kind of odd and sad that a horse died at an FEI level show jumping competition the same day and not even a peep was heard about him. If we're gonna be fair to the horses, we have to look at all deaths across all disciplines, and demand action (if necessary) from the FEI. USEA is not the right dog to be kicking.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This isn't exactly related, but as a fellow eventer who has dabbled in hunter/jumpers and dressage and show jumping and circuits like AQHA, I will say that I see more day-to-day concern about the well-being of the horse in eventing than I have in other sports I've been involved in. Maybe the death rate is up, but the horse's seem to enjoy their day to day lives and care more. Not excusing the deaths at all and I do think something needs to be done (although I'm not sure what the answer is), but in these other industries, abuse goes on DAILY and nothing is said about it because no one dies. I have experienced VERY minimal situations or training practices that I would call abusive in the eventing world- it's more like, feed them everything, let them out all the time, take it SLOW (with some exceptions, that I disagree with), yuck to gadgets, everything goes in a snaffle for the most part, and if the horses doesn't want to do it, find them another job, etc. more than anything else.

      Delete
    2. Having dabbled across lots of disciplines as well- I still feel like the eventers KNOW their horses the best and in general (at the elite levels) the training programs are clean and honorable.

      Delete
  10. I really have nothing to add as I've lately gotten into a weird conundrum with eventing myself (still attached to it, not sure I'll ever go above training level) but I do like your thoughts. Also, that old eventing video makes me cringe EVERY TIME. Basically cowboys jumping over huge things. Can't take it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. I think it was the first water jump video where the majority of horses fell and riders came off and they just tossed people back on and off they went. I get that it was military back then, but there is no way you can say that was safer.

      Delete
    2. Haha right? Every time one of the "old time" eventing videos gets passed around social media, it completely blows my mind. WHY would anyone ever want to go back to that? Omg. Scariest thing I've ever seen.

      It's a bit like when George Morris claims that rust breeches are so classic. Like. Dude. No. That's the 70s calling and they want their pants back.

      Delete
    3. I just watched one of the world championships from the 80's all the way through and I count 6 rotational falls. SIX. That's just in the footage they showed. And that's only the rotational ones, not just plain falls. Those were literally too numerous to count. Horses would fall, people would get back on and keep going. 9 horses were spun from the jog before show jumping. Can you IMAGINE if that kind of stuff happened today???

      Delete
  11. I'm going to preface this comment by saying that I am not an eventer; I have no intentions of ever eventing, I have never been cross-country schooling and I've only ever been a spectating fence judge at any 3-day event or horse trial, so please take what I've written with a giant boulder of salt.

    That said...while I can't offer any concrete suggestions about who should take the blame or what can/should be done to make eventing safer, I can comment on my experience of fence-judging at Jersey Fresh on Saturday, judging maybe the most technical and most dangerous (IMO) jump on the XC course (I will also add that the jump Philippa fell on was the only fall of the day at that jump, not to sound insensitive). I have fence-judged at the Horse Park of NJ for the past 3 years at numerous horse trials and at the international Jersey Fresh competition. I fence-judge because I genuinely enjoy watching Olympians and their amazing horses fly over massive jumps right in front of my eyes. Before Saturday, I had never judged at a fence that had so many bad falls, and had never witnessed the aftermath of a rotational fall and/or a rider's death.

    I don't know much about cross-country course design or the intricacies of the sport. But, watching 5 horses crash into/somersault over a solid wood fence took fence-judging from enjoyable to downright unsettling and scary. All 5 riders fell at our jump because their horses fell. We've all seen riders fall off and (hopefully) be able to walk away without serious injury. But watching 5 horses at the mercy of a dangerous (IMO) jump combination is a completely bizarre thing...it's just not something you ever expect to see, much less see 5 times in one day. While I didn't see Philippa's horse flip over the table, I heard it, and watched everything unfold afterwards. Saturday was the first time I've ever fence-judged and just wanted it to be over.

    I guess that's a very long-winded way of saying that something needs to be done in eventing to make every rider and every horse safer. I don't know what, I don't know how, but something needs to be done. Watching horses flip over jumps and falls that cause rider deaths is scary and unsettling, and shouldn't be part of any rider's thoughts coming out of the start box. Hopefully the tragic deaths of Philippa and Ouija will be the catalyst for change, but I'm uncertain how best that should happen.

    Sorry for the novel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Horses are giant prey animals that are simply not evolved to take a fall. Watching that should be scary. I don't envy you at all.

      Delete
  12. A totally different point of view that I had not even thought of. Thank you for opening my eyes to yet another knowledgeable way to look at this sport. :)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Lovely post. Great thoughts and well written.

    ReplyDelete
  14. An interesting and thought provoking post and I agree with quite a bit of what you are saying. However, as a jumper rider and the owner of a Grand Prix jumper and my own personal AO jumpers, I don't 100% agree that money is all it takes to get to the top in show jumping (or in dressage). I know people with essentially unlimited budgets, top trainers, and a decent amount of skill, that are unable to get to the GP level of show jumping. Sure, it takes money, but it also takes talent, bravery, and HARD WORK and dedication. I think it's unfair to say that show jumping is a pay to play sport.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I mostly agree with you--it absolutely takes a lot of bravery, desire, and dedication. It's equestrian sport. It's brutal hours and heartbreak and risk and all those things. I am not trying to downplay that. It's just that it also takes quite a lot of money and if you don't have that, you don't get to play. Sure, I can do local jumpers or maybe even get creative and do an A show or two a year, but I as a normal person will never have a chance to play on the world scene.

      Delete
  15. This is getting off track here, but in regards to the money question, what I think people forget is that money = time & opportunity. It basically takes your dedication & multiples it so you can acheive more than your average Joe can.
    A competitive rich person can ride all day everyday on the best coaches with the best horses, compete heaps & naturally they'll acheive success.
    As for discipline choice, to event you need to be good at 3 types of riding, DSG & SJ only one. It's quicker & easier to get good at 1 thing than 3, & time = money so for return of financial investment wise, SJ or DSG makes the most sense.
    To sum up I don't think it's offensive to say that SJ & DSG are more attractive & easier to succed in then eventing. I think it just is what it is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes this exactly. I'm definitely not anti-dressage or show jumping. I think they're great. Just being realistic about what it takes.

      Delete
    2. So I came back and haunted the comments section, because I think the conversation is super interesting. And then I started reading this article with Charlotte Dujardin and she speaks a lot on this topic (from "The Budget" on down. Just thought her words, being at the top of the dressage scene, had some relevance here.
      http://www.psdressage.com/viewarticle.php?id=2121

      Delete
  16. Very interesting post looking at the issue from this perspective! And great dialogue in the comments. IMO every single XC fence should become frangible/collapsible. Do we really need research to confirm this would increase safety? We already know that technology works.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Well written post and enjoyed the perspective!

    ReplyDelete