Our guest columnist of this week is Laura Tomlinson-Bechtolsheimer who wants to express her concern with the direction the FEI seems to be taking with its "Future of Dressage" modernization plan which was discussed at the 2015 FEI Sports Forum in Lausanne, Zwitserland, on 27 - 28 April 2015. Bechtolsheimer is the 2012 individual bronze and team gold Olympic medal winner and a long-time top competitor on the international Grand Prix scene.
FEI's Future of Dressage, Changes for the Better?
I am worried that many riders are not noticing the changes that are going on and decisions that are being taken about the future of dressage. I feel it's important that people realise what the FEI is proposing and take an interest before things happen under the radar and it's too late to take a stand.
In the FEI's proposal on the Future of Dressage I agree with their sentence that "the aim is to increase the interest in dressage without losing the current core fans." Dressage is not going to compete with football for the limelight, we will not be a mainstream sport no matter how radical the changes we make. We must nurture the interest already present and try to make those that occasionally take an interest in our sport do it more regularly.
We create followers by generating more understanding of the sport. People like to be "armchair experts." Commentary and judging need to be clear and understandable. At the top televised three-day events in the UK (Badminton and Burghley) the top riders all take turns in going to the commentary box and commentating other x-country rides, explaining how the course is to ride, etc. Dressage riders could do the same and have one or two good riders competing at a show agree to explain the tests from a rider's perspective in the commentary. It would be a good idea to invite a judge to join too.
The concept of "human interest stories" worries me a little. It's all very well that there is a personal element -- stories emerge naturally -- but if one turns media focus to "stories" rather than the sport then it will become a PR competition and again the "elitist" side of the sport will be exaggerated with riders with larger budgets having big PR campaigns and others confronted with just another thing that they can't afford
I have done the IDRC survey myself (editor's note: it is a survey similar to the FEI's Repucom survey on what people expect from the sport of dressage). I feel a lot of the answers were led by the way in which the questions were asked. In order to have productive meetings on progress for dressage, the panel needs real experts from the sport. Riders need to be involved in these decisions, it's the only way to make progress harmoniously and for the better of the sport. Expert panels that lack riders (top Grand Prix riders, not just people who once rode!) will miss the point on this subject and it all be a waste of time.
The FEI is questioning the value of the Grand Prix test and wants to use it just as a qualifier for further tests. Why does the Grand Prix need to be used only for qualification? It is the best test for horse and rider, assessing technical skill and quality of riding and training. What is the benefit of this proposal? If we are riding it anyway why should it not count? Not as many people watch the heats of swimming or running, everyone watches the final, that is fact regardless of what test it is. I wonder if the first day was a freestyle would you be so sure that it would be a sell out? No, you still only get the full house for the final. If we are riding the Grand Prix, it should count, even if just accumulatively. The champion should be the most consistently brilliant, like the show jumpers or eventing, and not just the winner of the day. With the two other Olympic equestrian disciplines there is no phase/test/round that doesn't count
One rider doing the Special is odd. If it counts for the team surely all riders need to do the test as it's a team event! In other sports a team means they all do it, show jumping you can't send one in to jump some obstancles and another to do the other jumps; nor does eventing have one doing x-country and the other show jumping and the other dressage?! People fly out to the Olympics to see the best and they want to see as much of the best doing the hardest things possible. They want to see rider and horse do all three tests, not just one or two bits. It is doing all there that is part of what makes it tough. Horses have to be fitter and more willing to keep going for their rider, even on the last day. This is a skill that a champion must possess and be tested in!
I'm baffled by the suggestion to introduce pas de deux into a championship format. It would be better to do rider swap for the top 4, like in show jumping than bring in something completely alien to our sport like pas de deux. This is a different sport and skill of riding! That is like getting 100 m sprinters to do hurdles for a one-off event. It might entertaining but it's not what we come to the Olympics to watch. Pas de deux would mean more horses! You couldn't just make two team horses do a pas de deux together?! For example, imagine that a mare and stallion are the best two horses a nation has? Or the two top horses from one nation move completely differently, no music fits them and they can't synchronise! Pas de deux and troix will mean that even the current experts in the sport will not have a clue anymore! It is hard enough to judge a freestyle correctly with music thrown into the mix, but add pas de deus/trois to the task and we will become a laughing stock. The judging will be so lost and unpredictable that the audience will really question what is going on!
In my opinion the FEI proposals seem to be just ideas to change things, but I fail to see what benefit or difference to the "aims" they are supposed to have.
If we want more countries represented in dressage, more time needs to be invested in educating riders, trainers, breeders and judges in those countries that we want to participate. They must raise their standards to join, and the FEI not lower the standards of the sport. Who wants to watch the Olympic marathon if they have shortened it to make it easy enough for more people to do. We watch the ice hockey final even if it is almost always between Canada and USA because we enjoy watching the best play the best.
Drama happens when there is an upset. Sport naturally takes care of that as long as the judges are willing to let a top rider "have a pole down" on a bad day. Dressage doesn't need an artificial suspense, especially as it is not like watching a race. It has other qualities that make up for the potential lack in drama. If a sport is too unpredictable I do not think it is always a benefit to spectators, people want to see their heroes win and in almost every sport, the top 10 are the top 10 for a reason, why try and find ways of making them fall just to make them fall. That is not exciting, it just leads to confusion. One can always have a bad day and it is the judges' responsibility to reward even the top combinations with the marks they deserve on THAT day! And just as importantly reward a new comer or unknown rider with the correct marks if s/he rides the test of their life. Then it is exciting enough without changing very much at all.
Let's improve what we have going on, rather than make too many changes too fast. More unified judging and better commentary will lead to more transparency and better understanding for onlookers. Jazz up clothes and music to make the popular bit more constantly popular and introduce the concept of horse swapping for the top 3 or 4 combinations. These are just a few ideas. Let's make the sport exciting within the realms of what the sport stands for: good (beautiful) riding on well trained horses.
by Laura Tomlinson-Bechtolsheimer