Re: Unofficial WEG Team

[CMKSAGEHIL@aol.com]

In a message dated 98-10-02 15:29:45 EDT, ccrespo@nigma.com writes:

<< The selection process is very partial to light weight riders. They are more
concerned
 with what the horse-rider team did in the two years prior to the competition
 rather than what they can do NOW. In my opinion, it is a very distorted
process.
 
 Until the selection decision is taken away from the closed door, back-room,
 unaccountable, horse show mentality currently in place , the team selected
will always be
 suspect and the wisdom of the selection will continue to be questioned.
 You will not see many men in the team  either.
 
 One day, I hope, the selection will be made based on an objective process
determined
 by the performance of the riders on specific races.  >>

I would have to strongly disagree with Carlos' interpretation of the selection
process used for continental and world championships.  The goal of selection
is not to see who can win Tevis or Old Dominion or Cosequin or any other race,
it is to send horses who are PEAKED to do their best at the championship!  The
reason that emphasis is placed on prior record is to show that the horse is a
CONSISTENT finisher and can CONSISTENTLY be competitive.  It does very little
good to send a squad of horses that may win a prestigious ride here and there,
only to be pulled at half of the competitions he enters.  A history
demonstrates that the rider KNOWS how to peak the horse for specific
competitions, and the riders are constantly interviewed by the selectors to
see how "on target" they are with their plans for the horse during the
selection year.  I have been a selector for a gold-medal continental
championship team, and I can remember how upset some of the other selectors
were with me when I argued against sending a horse that had had a great year
and had just won a 100-miler that I had vetted, and that had been one of our
"top drawer" horses all year.  I didn't like the fact that the horse looked
tired and wrung out, and didn't turn in the sorts of vet scores he should have
at the BC judging.  He had had a hard season and was already on his way down.
Sure enough, he entered another 100-miler three weeks later, was pulled for
metabolic problems, and had to be extensively treated.  This is where human
judgment comes into play in the selection process.  

The process will never be perfect, but other FEI disciplines have had
selection processes much as you describe, where performances at specific
events are used and scored, and they have had never-ending problems with
sending horses that are past their peak for the "big event."  We had the same
problem in The Hague, when too many of our great horses had been ridden with
the idea that they had to somehow beat each other up during the selection
process.  Pretty dumb, when you think about it.  There is enough bad luck in
this sport without sending horses that are tired, stressed nearly to the point
of injury, etc.  Other factors enter in, too, such as whether a horse excels
on the type of course that the particular event will have, and (especially in
the case of overseas events) how well he hauls long distances.  Nope, I hope
the selection process keeps human judgment front and center, and that we keep
refining our ideas and learning more about the selection process with every
event we enter.

The hardest part about the selection process this year was that we really DID
have a lot of depth in the long list--many horses were still looking terrific,
and we could get a ways down our alternate list and still send a pretty
impressive squad, IMO.  I will strongly second your good wishes for their
success in Dubai. 

Heidi Smith, DVM--Sagehill Arabians (Oregon)