USPA-Either Lead or Get Out of the Way

In recent weeks I have monitored the Message Board at Polozone.  I have seen a number of people post messages and make comments.  There’s polopro and polonut, polo ace and arena polo.  I read about criticisms of the Governors of the USPA, the promotion of high-goal polo over low goal polo, some inside information on the workings of the USPA and some ideas and proposals by the participants in an effort to make the polo community more polo friendly and to charter a course for the future of the game.

My question is, if so many diifferent ideas can be shared on this Message Board, why can’t the “brain trust” within the USPA come up with any ideas?  Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying I agree with each and every one of the posts, but I applaud the fact that direction is being discussed and a future for the game is being offered.  Okay, USPA, it’s time for you to put up or get out.  Either do the job or get out of the way.  There have already been rumblings of a new association that will be responsive to its membership, that will create plan for the future of the association.  I would think that the USPA might get the hint.  It’s time to step up to the plate or go back to the bench and sit down.  Let someone else take your place in the starting lineup.  Well, what’s it going to be?

Establish an International Polo Presence Again

Years ago the United States reigned supreme in the area of international polo. It had a national coach who selected the players, through test matches. The players would then represent the United States in international competition. That practice has disappeared over the years as national team selections seem to rely upon patrons or USPA insiders to fill out the team. Examples: John Goodman, the first pure patron to play on a Westchester Cup team (1997), with the US losing the cup for the first time in over 80 years! In 1973 and 1974 Bill Ylvisaker played with the US team in Coronation Cup play. Why, because he was the best available player? I don’t think so. In 1974 Camacho Cup competition, Bill Sinclair played on the US team, a political payoff or the best player for the team?
I don’t remember Steve Gose asking to play in the Cup of the America series he sponsored in 1979 and 1980.
And when was the last time any test matches were held? Too expensive? That was the old chorus, but the USPA funding looks pretty solid today, thanks to Polo Properties.
Now you might ask why would we want to spend money to sponsor a national team, aside from the tradition and international prestige it brings our association? Well, possibly because it would not only get our high-goal players competing internationally again, but in the course of these competitions, Polo Properties might find that the exposure aids in their marketing efforts. Strange concept? It shouldn’t be. It’s the same approach we use when we try to get Ralph Lauren to sponsor a team or Piaget to sponsor a tournament. If it’s a good argument for other sponsors then it would be a natural for Polo Properties.
As for a national coach, we have a number of top players who have evidently been classified as over-the-hill, veteran players who are encyclopedias of knowledge waiting to be asked to assist in such efforts. Players like Tommy Wayman, Bart Evans, Roy Barry, Red Armour, Corky Linfoot, Charles Smith and Dale Smicklas.
The first step, however, will have to be taken by the USPA and any leadership it might be able to rally.

Does the Umpiring Suck This Year?

I was talking with former 10-goaler Daniel Gonzalez and an Argentine 9-goaler the other day as we watched 26-goal contest. The 9-goaler and I talked about how much better the umpiring was this season compared to last season. Daniel asked us if we thought the umpiring this year was good. We agreed that it was, in fact, terrible, but we agreed that it was better than last year.
Wh is it that our umpiring isn’t getting any better. Why is it that there doesn’t seem to be any program that allows the lesser rated umpires to improve their skills to the point where they can actually improve their ratings an break into the upper echelon of umpires that appear in “all” of the high-goal matches.
On the other hand, we agreed, there ought to be some system in effect that can actually lower the ratings of umpires who do a poor job.
“If I play poorly,” said the 9-goaler, “I’m out of a job. If the umpires do poorly, there doesn’t seem to be any action taken. It’s like the federal government.”
So my question is, what is the system that is being employed, and who is monitoring it, including the jobe being done by the Director of Umpire Services and the National Umpire Committee?
Later in the day I watches a game in which it looked as though the umpires were trying to give the game to the club owner. Nine of the ten goals that were scored by his team come on penalty shots, with the opposing team, and ultimate winner, committing penalties at a 3-1 ratio to the host team.
There is a great deal of money that is being spent to play high-goal polo, and the umpires who officiate the top games make the most money, but if they consistantly deliver poor efforts who is there to discipline them, replace them, demote them? Who is there to actually make these officials responsible for the jobs they do?
The umpires are doing a far better job this year than they did last year. The problem is that the job they are doing this year is not very good. Who is going to accept the responsibility for this, and will they be able to protect their job if they aren’t performing it acceptably?

Any ideas out there?

USPA, PTF, Use Your Assets!

When I review the action, or lack of action by the USPA and the PTF I can’t help but reflect upon the number of assets that are being ignored by both of these organizations. I’m not speaking diectly of the ample treasuries available to each organization. I am speaking about some of the living legends of the game who are celebrated for their induction into the Hall of Fame, but are quickly retired to a shelf in a closed cabinet, never to be heard from again.
I saw this happen in the past when the likes of George Oliver, Cecil Smith, Chico Barry, Ray Harrington and others were allowed to gather together in a group on the north end of the Retama stadium seats discussing the play of the teams and the ability of the horses to one another. This elite group is now gone, and the polo community has seemingly learned nothing from it.
Today we have alumni like Roy Barry, Tommy Wayman, Bart Evans, Red Armour, Charles Smith, Bobby Beveridge, Allan Scherer, Corky Linfoot, Benny Gutierrez, just to name a few. Each one of them gets older every day, and each one of them has a lifetime of knowledge to pass on. The problem is that nobody is asking.
At one time, the PTF was financing books and litereature to support the advancement of the game. At no time, to my knowledge, did they invest in a program that would have gleaned the knowledge from these luminaries of the game so that it might be passed down.
Rege Ludwig is probably considered one of the top polo instructors in the game, yet it appears that neither the USPA nor the PTF have found it necessary to approach him to organize a national instructional program for them. Corky Linfoot has more knowledge to impart to interested young players, and is more than ready and willing to share it, yet no one in either the PTF nor the USPA has found it beneficial to approach him.
It saddens me to see Tommy Wayman stopping in Wellington for a visit while Bart Evans watches the games from the sidelines. Doesn’t anyone realize that these guys are our reference books?
I continually see the USPA and the PTF turn to someone with the latest new idea while failing to recognize the assets it already has. We seem to retain stale and old leadership, crediting these people with “years of experience” but don’t offer the same acknowledgements to our legends.
Until the USPA and the PTF learn to turn use these assets to their fullest, they will be destined to sit in idle and rev the engine-going nowhere and burning gas.

Youth Polo-Expensive PTF Subsidized Day Care?

You know the phrase “the future of polo is in our youth” was spoken by Louise Hitchcock to a room full of overprivileged young men who would never have to work a day in their lives.  It has become the rallying cry behind every youth polo movement and no one has questioned that if once these young men are taught the game, they will be able to afford to play it.

Today I look over the list of children involved in the youth polo programs and notice that nearly every one of them is the son or daughter of a player.  And it has been my experience that just about every one of them would be playing with or without the assistance of the PTF.  So I guess my question is are we really bringing new people into the game or is the PTF just subsidizing very expensive day care for the offspring of current players?

Is anyone tracking the “success” of the I/I programs, or are we just assuming that because young people are playing the game, they will continue to play it?  If there is no tracking system in place to validate the investment, and I fear that there is not, maybe the PTF ought to rethink its approach to spreading the game. 

Intercollegiate Polo

Is anyone looking out for intercollegiate polo? We seem to have enough people delegated to take an interest yet there doesn’t seem to be any clearly defined blueprint that will help to insure the health of individual programs across the country.
If you go to the USPA website you will find a number of listing of college programs that no longer exist.
We have two I/I field directors and the I/I Committee that ought to have some idea of the status or health of each and every program in the country, yet we see program after program flounder. Maybe a little coordinated effort could be made to strengthen these ranks.
There are a number of very strong programs in the country that are supported locally by alumni, families and the communities themselves, but the wealth of experience they have used to solidify their programs need to be shared with each and every other program in the country.
How many people do we have to delegate to see that this porgram is properly supervised and supported?

USPA Polo Properties-what’s going on?

When is the U. S. polo community going to ask questions about the USPA Polo Properties and the monies that are supposed to be generated from it?
It is depicted as a “wholly-owned” subsidiary of the USPA with a mission to secure a long term source of income for the Association by licensing its trademarks in commerce throughout the world.
Now I don’t know about the rest of you, but the most exposure I see the clothing line getting is on the “Cops” TV show in the evenings.
That aside, how much money is being generated and where is it going? (The properties website indicates that since its incorporation in 1981, “the U. S. Polo Association has realized total global retail sales of nearly $1 billion”). Does the Association have any plan for the ongoing distribution of the income? What are the goals or objectives which the Association hopes to accomplish with the monies and what are the salaries of the staff of the USPA Properties?
David Cummings is the former Director of the USPA who I believe directed a vast sum of money to be spent to upgrade the computer system for the USPA only to find out it was neither cost effective in the long run nor compatible with any other systems the USPA used.
When he saw that the real money was in USPA Properties, he jumped ship to intern under a licensing professional that was brought aboard by Merle Jenkins. Once he learned as much as he needed to learn, he cut the professional loose and hired his wife to help him run USPA Properties. What are these people getting paid (with no previous training in this field) and what additional perks (travel, expenses, etc.) do they receive? If this is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the USPA, why can’t the membership be informed of these facts?
Doesn’t anyone wnt to know about these things?

The North American Polo League

I recently came across an e-mail debunking some of the “aims and goals” of the NAPL, and I thought it would be interesting to look into the minds of some of the “leaders” of the American polo community in an effort to understand their motives and the planning behind the NAPL.
I believe that a blogger on the polobarn.com Message Board pointed out that the organization of the NAPL was simply an effort by some of the game’s wealthiest patrons to write off their polo expenses, and I agree. But for the moment, we aren’t going to get into the motivation, just the flawed structuring behind the effort.
We are now looking at a “professional sports league” that is neither professional nor a league. It is one year old has NO sponsor, NO television contract and owns NO facilities of its own.
The “league” is structured to have a 12 month season, unusual for a professional league to have non-stop year-round activity.
The last “season” opened with two tournaments in Wyoming. Now understand that the efforts behind this are striving to open the game up to millions of new spectators. That must be why they chose to begin the season in the least populated state in the country and in a town with a population of 178, Big Horn. That would mean that if everyone in town got a date from another town and went to the polo matches there would be less than 500 people in attendance-hardly a portion of the millions the NAPL is hoping to attract.
The NAPL speaks of “broadening the fan base” but has not addressed the fact that there are only a handful of “fan friendly” polo facilities in the country and less than a half dozen stadium-like structures (Greenwich, International Polo Club, Royal Palm Polo Club and Santa Barbara Polo Club), three of which don’t host any NAPL events.
These are the same brilliant minds that are helping to set the course for the USPA. These are successful business men who seem to be incapable of reviewing the manner in which other professional leagues and franchises are developed, and choosing, instead, to do it “their way”.
The NAPL is a joke, and I believe that the joke is about over.
Only four of the NAPL teams competed in the opening tournament (two supported by the Johnston family and two supported by the Goodman family), they received points for their efforts (right on down to 4th place). But the NAPL is quick to point out that the other teams will catch up when the high-goal season gets underway in Florida. A novel approach to a professional sports league. Half of the teams get a six month start on the other half.
Keep in mind that two of the teams that didn’t make the trek to Wyoming excelled in other competitions with Black Watch playing in the finals of the Mercedes-Benz Challenge and semifinals of the Hampton Cup at Bridgehampton (which attracts tens of thousands of spectators) and Lechuza Caracas winning the British Open-received no points for their efforts. Confusing to the uninitiated, no?
I spoke with a banker who was approached by the NAPL for sponsorship and was told that they had no interest. He told me that when you have a group of billionaires who are not willing to make a “significant” initial investment in their “league”, he and otheres of his industry are not about to step up to the plate, financially.
Another high-goal patron who passed on joining the league cited th fact that until there is a real value established for the teams there is no real shot at a tax write-off.
The “league” has no “members only league schedule”, instead using a number of established USPA tournaments in which to participate. There is no play-off formula, and the “championship” is to be awarded on the strength of points accumulated (including tournaments in Lexington, Kentucky and Big Horn, Wyoming) at venues with no link to large population bases.
The fact that it is billed as a “professional” league ahd has patrons participating is akin to watching the New York Yankees play with George Steinbrenner playing first base.
The charade is over, it’s time to move on.

Handicapping Players, Not To Be Taken Lightly

I don’t understand the logic of some of the recent handicap changes.
Last year the US Open Championship Crab Orchard team (handicapped at 27-goals because David Sterling was bumped from seven goals to eight before Open play began) jumped from a 26-goal team to a 29-goal team, yet they barely managed to sneak past Jedi by a goal in the closing seconds of the game.
It appears that there might be some political reasons for either raising or lowering players’ handicaps. The question is, who’s next?
Catamount will be the first team to come under scrutiny. Capturing the Joe Barry Memorial and playing well in the opening round of the Ylvisaker Cup it will be easy for the handicappers to overlook the fact that Catamount will be through after the Ylvisaker Cup. There is no 26-goal competition for them (with the exception of Roldan, who will be playing with Pony Express) and because of that, they are mounted on their top horses.
The teams which they are competing against are, for the most part, riding back-up horses. They are starting to get their 26-goal horses into shape, but they are not playing their top horses.
Remember, horses are at least 80% of the game, so I guess Catamount’s advantage has to be credited to the horses, and the great teamplay among the players.
The possibility that some of the Catamount players have their handicaps raised is a real possibility, but the wisdom in it has to be questioned. A good tournament, a winning streak are short-lived in the polo world (unless you’re Adolfo Cambiaso) when the handicappers should be looking at what handicap these players are able to carry without this team around them.
Maybe the Handicap Committee will take a look at some of the players that were elevated last year to see how well-merited the changes were. Only time will tell.

The Real Story Behind the PTF

If you stick around a sport long enough, you’re bound to find out some of the basic realities of its institutions, and that is the case with the PTF and me.

Although the original claims of the PTF had to do with the promotion of the game and the instruction of young players, concepts that date back to Tommy Hitchcock’s mother, the reality was that it was created to offer tax write-offs for wealthy polo patrons.

In the early days of the PTF, it was understood that horses could be donated to it with full tax benefits.  The truth of the matter is that many of these “donations” were nothing more than broken down polo ponies who were no longer able to play the game.  The donors, however, were able to claim “full price” donation values.  Don’t believe it?  See if the PTF will make the early records available to you.

Now, let’s take a look at its current mission statement-”to establish and administer a series of funds”.  Of course, in able to administer these funds, an extended staff is needed, and the PTF was more than willing to staff up.

As it comes as no surprise save to anyone but the incredibly naive or blatently stupid, the playing membership of the United States Polo Association has not made any significant growth in over 40 years.  By playing the numbers game (encouraging grooms to join for the insurance benefits and refusing to address the large number of members lost each and every year) smoke and mirrors have been used to misdirect the questions asked of them, however, both the USPA and the PTF have muddied the water enough to make the general membership believe that they are making great advances.

It wasn’t too long ago that the PTF relied upon volunteers, and then a Field Director to carry out its initial aims.  Today we find that the PTF staff has grown to include a full-time staff of eight members (Executive Director, Field Director (2), Head Umpire Instructor, Bushy Creek Ranch Field Director, Executive Assistant (2), Operations Manager), and God knows how many part time employees.

The PTF is currently sitting on over $6 million, and has shown little success in either promoting the game or increasing the membership, and it has eight times as many people on hand as it used to in an effort to assist in this folly.

There is no sense in looking to the USPA for assistance, since this august body has grown from an Executive Secretary and an Executive Director to a staff of nine with two offices.

Is anyone out there listening?  Isn’t it important that the association functions properly, or is it no more than a case of the blind leading the apathetic?

Since the founding of the PTF in 1967 there has been no leadership that has been able to neither effectively promote the game of polo nor develop the interscholastic or intercollegiate ranks.  If you take a look at the number of colleges that have polo programs you will notice that there has been little change over the many years.  More importantly, an overwhelming majority of the young players fail to continue playing (with the exception of legacies).

The leadership should be held accountable.  The paid “staff” should be held accountable.  There should be some progress or a reason why our staffs have ballooned to nearly ten times what they operated with forty years ago with the same number of playing members.