Amateur rule: where do you protest someone’s status?

[atlatl]

Thanks for the detailed response.

@J-Lu

My concern is that the order of horses can influence the placings, depending on the judge. A spectacular mover but poorly ridden hose will influence the scores of the horses presenting afterwards. At the lower levels, movement is rewarded over riding. Therefore, those with the money to purchase an expensive horse even if they can’t ride it well will out-compete an average but well trained and well ridden mover. Not always, but it happens alot. This isn’t about ribbons, it is about a well trained and well ridden horse beat by a natural mover but poorly trained or poorly ridden horse. That’s wrong. I realize the recent collective scores attempt to address this. But people like Lilo Fore will further the idea that money buys ribbons and good comments/scores. It’s sort of the antithesis of dressage. It supports the idea that money is the most important factor in the sport of dressage. Again, why would I want to spent close to $700 to lose to a poorly ridden but talented horse that some ammie buys and has in training with their trainer? That’s not a level playing field, which is why USDF has progressively lost membership. I can have my trainer tell me how my horse rides a test or pay less than $700 for a clinician (even Janet Foy or Tom Poulin or Carla Symader) to tell me how we ride the movements. I don’t need to spend $700 at a recognized show for minimal input. This is a problem for USDF.

I’m very happy to talk about this.

There’s a lot packaged in your response, but I’m not seeing anything that is related to the amateur status of a rider.

We clearly have different experiences, and that’s too bad. I’m sorry that yours have been so bad. It seems your fundamental issue is with the overall method of scoring dressage tests in competition period, dot. Yes, good training should be rewarded, and yes, I too have seen poor riders on fabulous and incredibly generous horses outscore average but well ridden movers. I’ve also seen average but well ridden movers outscore poorly ridden “better for dressage” horses.

I believe the root of your issue is in dressage tests themselves, the associated purpose and directives in addition to the USDF/FEI scoring methodology. Essentially, the ideal standard in use.

I happen to have 3-1 handy so using that as an example, the purpose of the test includes things like demonstrates increased engagement, especially in the extended gaits. If your horse’s extended gaits aren’t markedly different from the collected gaits, well, that’s going to score lower than a horse that does show a difference. Increased balance and self-carriage is easier for a purpose bred dressage horse much the same way that basketball is easier for tall people.

Of the 23 movements in this particular test, the word engagement is in the directives for 16 of them. Quality of gait is explicitly listed or implied (reference to rhythm, elasticity, suspension etc) in 21 of them. So the fancy horse isn’t just getting the big gaits score in the collectives, but pretty much a bump in most of the test movements. I know you know this.

That said, the rider’s skills are also being judged in every movement too. Can’t steer; it’s going to be tough to have good geometry in your test. Can’t sit the trot; well, that fancy boy isn’t going to lift up his back for long if you’re pounding his kidneys.

I would say that both movement and riding are rewarded, however, that movement / natural talent in a horse makes the test movements easier so there probably is more bang for the buck there.

That all said, I agree with Lilo Fore that good movement shouldn’t be penalized. People have suggested that, saying that if a horse is moving with an uphill balance at training level they aren’t demonstrating a TL outline so should be marked down. I think that’s BS.

I think USDF and frankly horse sport in general is in decline for a number of reasons but the biggest is cost of keeping of a horse, not purchase price or showing expenses. I’m in LA county where board at a safe facility with decent footing ranges anywhere from $600 - $1000 a month. One of the largest stables in Orange county, over 200 horses, just was sold for real estate development. That’s the biggest problem our horse community faces, not showing fees.

[lorilu]

because its not about the color of the ribbon. It’s about your own personal score and personal journey.

[J-Lu]

@BigMama1

@J-Lu

At the lower levels, movement is rewarded over riding. Therefore, those with the money to purchase an expensive horse even if they can’t ride it well will out-compete an average but well trained and well ridden mover.

Disagree. The lower levels is where the average moving but relaxed and well-ridden horse can compete against a “fancy” big moving horse. Obviously if both horses produce accurate, correct, and relaxed tests, the better mover will win. But at Training and First, the quality of gaits doesn’t outweigh tension, hollowness, resistance, mistakes, etc.

In scribing I have seen many “ordinary” horses out score some truly lovely ones, largely because the lovely ones couldn’t produce the relaxation and consistency rewarded at those levels. By Second and particularly Third, where more self carriage, expression, and “thrust” are required, the more athletic movers definitely have the advantage.

We can agree to disagree based on our own experiences showing and scribing. Sure, hollowness and resistance and mistakes will mar a test. But the rider riding a well-bred horse at Training and First mostly needs to stay out of the horse’s way to score well.

I disagree that at Second and Third, the lovely movers have an advantage. In my experience, that’s where training comes into play. An average mover can, sometimes, understand collection and the movements and submission where as many lovely movers can’t understand the aids or fight collection. Thus the downfall of so many Sando Hit babies.

[J-Lu]

@atlatl

Thanks for the detailed response.

@J-Lu

My concern is that the order of horses can influence the placings, depending on the judge. A spectacular mover but poorly ridden hose will influence the scores of the horses presenting afterwards. At the lower levels, movement is rewarded over riding. Therefore, those with the money to purchase an expensive horse even if they can’t ride it well will out-compete an average but well trained and well ridden mover. Not always, but it happens alot. This isn’t about ribbons, it is about a well trained and well ridden horse beat by a natural mover but poorly trained or poorly ridden horse. That’s wrong. I realize the recent collective scores attempt to address this. But people like Lilo Fore will further the idea that money buys ribbons and good comments/scores. It’s sort of the antithesis of dressage. It supports the idea that money is the most important factor in the sport of dressage. Again, why would I want to spent close to $700 to lose to a poorly ridden but talented horse that some ammie buys and has in training with their trainer? That’s not a level playing field, which is why USDF has progressively lost membership. I can have my trainer tell me how my horse rides a test or pay less than $700 for a clinician (even Janet Foy or Tom Poulin or Carla Symader) to tell me how we ride the movements. I don’t need to spend $700 at a recognized show for minimal input. This is a problem for USDF.

I’m very happy to talk about this.

There’s a lot packaged in your response, but I’m not seeing anything that is related to the amateur status of a rider.

We clearly have different experiences, and that’s too bad. I’m sorry that yours have been so bad. It seems your fundamental issue is with the overall method of scoring dressage tests in competition period, dot. Yes, good training should be rewarded, and yes, I too have seen poor riders on fabulous and incredibly generous horses outscore average but well ridden movers. I’ve also seen average but well ridden movers outscore poorly ridden “better for dressage” horses.

I believe the root of your issue is in dressage tests themselves, the associated purpose and directives in addition to the USDF/FEI scoring methodology. Essentially, the ideal standard in use.

I happen to have 3-1 handy so using that as an example, the purpose of the test includes things like demonstrates increased engagement, especially in the extended gaits. If your horse’s extended gaits aren’t markedly different from the collected gaits, well, that’s going to score lower than a horse that does show a difference. Increased balance and self-carriage is easier for a purpose bred dressage horse much the same way that basketball is easier for tall people.

Of the 23 movements in this particular test, the word engagement is in the directives for 16 of them. Quality of gait is explicitly listed or implied (reference to rhythm, elasticity, suspension etc) in 21 of them. So the fancy horse isn’t just getting the big gaits score in the collectives, but pretty much a bump in most of the test movements. I know you know this.

That said, the rider’s skills are also being judged in every movement too. Can’t steer; it’s going to be tough to have good geometry in your test. Can’t sit the trot; well, that fancy boy isn’t going to lift up his back for long if you’re pounding his kidneys.

I would say that both movement and riding are rewarded, however, that movement / natural talent in a horse makes the test movements easier so there probably is more bang for the buck there.

That all said, I agree with Lilo Fore that good movement shouldn’t be penalized. People have suggested that, saying that if a horse is moving with an uphill balance at training level they aren’t demonstrating a TL outline so should be marked down. I think that’s BS.

I think USDF and frankly horse sport in general is in decline for a number of reasons but the biggest is cost of keeping of a horse, not purchase price or showing expenses. I’m in LA county where board at a safe facility with decent footing ranges anywhere from $600 - $1000 a month. One of the largest stables in Orange county, over 200 horses, just was sold for real estate development. That’s the biggest problem our horse community faces, not showing fees.

Thanks! My comments, as my comments before, relate to the wealth of the amateur rider. It’s pretty simple!

No, I’ve done quite well for myself on horses. Would I have done better on fancier horses? Yes. It’s not about the ribbon as much as the progression and experience.

Sure, 3-1. Very much of this test is perfected by actual training and muscle development. And sure, training like flying changes. The horse at this point has to show these changes and be responsive to aids and be able to actually collect. They have to engage. I don’t think many fancy movers at Training and First can compete to upper levels/FEI and Scott Hassler agrees with me due to what is involved with collection. My above point is that a fancy horse in professional training will likely beat a more regular horse not in professional training. Do you disagree?

No one showing at second or above can’t steer, let’s be honest. I’ve seen plenty of people not sit the trot well but their horses gaits saved them. Come on. Reality is that a poor rider sitting on a nice horse that they pay to have in professional training will likely score as well or beat others in AA classes unless the owner is inept.

Come on. Do you disagree? Haven’t you seen lots of this?

ETA, My great friend had a horse at a large boarding facility outside of LA. She never learned a lick of training, she just showed up an rode. She’s not filling out all the gaps in her riding/training experiences.

[J-Lu]

Sorry, test scores mean a lot. That figures into the ribbons. My personal journey should have to depend so much on my wallet in AA classes.

[BigMama1]

@J-Lu

My above point is that a fancy horse in professional training will likely beat a more regular horse not in professional training.

And a more regular horse in full time pro training may well beat a fancier one with crappy training.

[Manni01]

Hah… if it is not about the color of the ribbon why do you have the stupid distinction of AA and open?? one of the reason is the color of the ribbon

[atlatl]

I’ll try to answer your questions without quoting the whole previous conversation so bear with me.

Yep, I agree that a fancy horse in professional trainer with a good trainer will likely do better than an average horse with a less skilled amateur riding alone. Do you agree that not all professional trainers are equally competent? I have a friend that keeps her nice, but not crazy fancy horse at home who regularly scores higher than ammies from a local “pro’s” barn.

Alas, I’ve seen many riders at 2nd and a few at 3rd that can’t steer despite being in full training. Honestly, cross my heart. I’ve seen a lovely lady with 2 fancy FEI horses in full training go off course on both in the same PSG class.

Pretty much everything I’ve said supports the idea that a lesser rider on a fancy horse in full training with a competent pro is likely to score higher than a competent rider on a less talented horse, so no argument there. Note I say likely because all kinds of things happen at horse shows. My point is that is how the tests are written and how the judging criteria works so there is nothing “unfair” about it and one can still score in the 60s on a regular horse and earn medals.

Now, if you want to win prizes in competitions with other horses, you’re more likely to be impacted by better horses winning as they do have an advantage because of how the tests are written and scored. If you’re only competing against yourself, who cares what the others score? I’ve scribed enough to have confidence that the majority of judges are not so easily blinded by fancy movers to score a competent ride on a regular horse unfairly low. YMMV

[BigMama1]

The judge judges the horse that’s in front of them in the ring for those 5 minutes. Some people seem to want a special badge or identifier so the judge can give them extra credit for doing all the training themselves, or being on a shoestring budget, or whatever the excuse is. It doesn’t work like that.

I have read every post in this thread and still struggle to understand why some are so worried about what other riders do. They criticize the AA division, saying it was created because rich AA’s wanted to win better ribbons, yet their complaint is they themselves can’t win better ribbons because of the rich AAs.

They don’t believe AAs and pros should be separated, but instead of just competing in the Open division themselves and letting other ammies decide which is right for them, they think no AAs should get that choice.

They say “what’s the point of showing if I don’t have a chance of winning?” Good question. That’s why I rarely show, personally. I hate it, I’m not great at it, and I don’t care where I place or score relative to other people, so I really don’t see the point of spending $1000 to do it when my budget is really tight to begin with. That’s just me. I enjoy the test clinics we have at our barn with an FEI judge, so I know where I’m scoring and have a benchmark to gauge my own progress.

If someone can’t handle the idea that there will always be people with more expensive horses, more money and time to train, or just more talent, maybe they shouldn’t show either. Or maybe they should show at a lower level or schooling show circuit where they can win all the ribbons and others will be jealous of them for having the “fancy” horse.

[clanter]

@BigMama1

show circuit where they can win all the ribbons

we had a mare who had the misfortune of being in the same area as three other very good horses (all were national champions) this mare won piles of second place ribbons, once she was told Red Ribbons are winners in Canada she was happy

[atlatl]

@clanter

we had a mare who had the misfortune of being in the same area as three other very good horses (all were national champions) this mare won piles of second place ribbons, once she was told Red Ribbons are winners in Canada she was happy

This is so awesome!!

[AltersAreUs]

@Manni01

hey were able to vote if they presented an ID with an adress… So if they moved out of the reservation they would get this adress…

Not dressage related so I know I shouldn’t be answering but [edit], the right to vote should NEVER depend on your [edit] address! As long as you are a US citizen, even if you live abroad, you have a right to vote!

Let’s just force people to move out of their homes so they can qualify to vote … the unamerican BS can people justify on this board absolutely astounds me.

[lorilu]

So that the best AAs can be rewarded with year and awards, just like the best Vintage riders are rewarded (no complaints there?) or the best Jr/YR (no complaints?). WHat about the All-Breeds awards? DO you feel that is unfair, because if your horse is not registered anywhere you cannot win one? What about breed restricted classes (such as at Arab or Morgan shows)? DO you feel that is also unfair?

It comes down to the personal journey.

SHows around here don’t always separate out AAs if there are fewer than 3 in the class. SOme managers do.

We will never agree. I follow my own journey. You should as well.

[Manni01]

Just wondering if you even know what I was talking about… I am totally against this North Dakota law and I think the final decision of the court is kind of ridiculous, because it didn’t eliminate the law but told the companies which run the reservations to provide street names for the houses in the reservation…

[Manni01]

Of course for all this money you pay you need some nice ribbons… My path is different…you are right about it…

[CanteringCarrot]

This thread is, um, controversial enough. I’d let the politics die. Or continue the conversation over in Current Events.

[AltersAreUs]

My apologies - I didn’t read the sarcasm in your original posts and I’m not good with tracking names with personalities here. There are more than a few COTH posters who would have posted what you did completely “straight faced”.

[Manni01]

Not a problem at all, glad we sorted it out

[La-LaPopRider]

@netg

But if you discuss changing the rules, you should start with the idea of, what is the point of the rule? And how can you shape it to do that? I think we’ve seen that most of the people steering things at the USDF and USEF level have no interest in being welcoming or helping foster the future of the sport by bringing in more people. If it doesn’t mean more money, they don’t appear to feel it worth their time.

So much this. Just look at where the money goes for “grants.” And, more importantly, where it comes from.
Board members are well funded -or believe me they would not hold positions on the board at USEF. Those Pro’s who receive grants (the big one’s/50k plus) aren’t necessarily the “best & most talented.” They’re just the best WRT their friendships with said board members. ESPECIALLY board members who directly are reps to the USOPC.

The Ammies and YR’s who receive grants- are given 500 - 1k only. And guess where it goes? Right back in the pockets of the people who first received the “big grants.” An example- a YR or ammie gets a $500 grant to “develop her career,” or “discover dressage.” She wrote in her application that she wants a clinic with (totally randomly picked by me “sort of,” bigger name trainer ) Endel Ots. (Sorry EO… just picked a name from the grant recipient program - out of a hat… if you will, no harm intended.) Endel just received (let’s say) a huge grant from the Fritz Kundrun fund. “Discover Dressage.” Now, YR/ammie will use her “grant,” to pay “Endel,” to take whatever $500-1k will buy her. A nice recycling of funds, just a bit lopsided in size and scale. The YR (or ammie) can’t earn money from “clients who train with them.” That would deem them “pro.” Yet, the lion’s share of the grants are awarded to the bigger name’s in the sport (NOT the biggest - Bc they are busy “running the show) who can and do earn big bucks from their clients.

And let’s face it. What does 500 or even 1k really do for a YR or ammie really wanting to develop their skills & horses? One lesson? 3? One clinic?

The point is, USEF has pretty much zero interest in keeping ammies or even “low level pro’s,” in the competition ring. Or, the participation circle. Will they take your $$? Of course? But, They have their “winners,” already chosen by the largest donors’ reps/in pocket board members of USEF and their chosen board member rep/s to the USOPC. I think it should all be re-written. I think there shouldn’t be a CEO for the charity of “private donors.” If we were all privy to who works directly for these private donors - who also sit on the board of USEF… the picture would become a whole lot clearer- and much less like-able.

Zipping my flame suit now… Bc… if we really took a closer look, we’d have to admit, some VERY shady things have occurred. USEF receives “Discover Dressage,” “Developing Dressage,” and almost every other Dressage related charity donation- NOT USDF. The people running the show are few. But, they are running the “show.” And until something is done about that -tiny squabbles re “who is really an ammie or pro,” and “how or if (g) we should ‘report them” (maybe so, maybe not) - is just a distraction to the bigger picture. And whether it’s fair or not, (not even thinking about providing my opinion here) this is the way it will continue. It was never meant to be “inclusive.” Just to provide the illusion that it is while both ammies & lesser known pro’s happily throw more & more money at the most well funded NGB possibly ever. USEF.

Either some of us love competing & training Bc it’s fun regardless of that “bigger picture,” - or some (g) love competing to put others down. Until the larger issue is solved, (something tells me it’s not off the table at the moment) the best we can do is be the former- NOT the latter. Just my 2 cents- and that’s exactly what’s it worth.

[La-LaPopRider]

Sometimes, I read your posts and wish there were a way to press the “like,” button 500 times.