I didn’t know you replied to my call thru a post, I have read and reread many threads, and it’s quite obvious I missed yours. I am new to all this BB etique and so I apologize.
I want to thank you for responding and in my earlier post on this thread, want to know what I can do now to protrect my right to ride at any level. I would love to get involved in anyway so as to make sure this doesn’t get passed in July.
Again, sorry Jennifer.
Well, comments like those of “RonaldGroen” can just be taken right back to Germany, or Canada, or Hades, or from wherever he/she/it brought them, in my opinion. BEAT IT!!!
One of my biggest complaints about the whole frickin’ “qualifying criteria” documents that have been passed around is the statement “Based on existing European models”. I sincerely hope that the motivation for the whole hoo hah mess is our horses’ well-being and NOT becoming a world dressage power.
Puh-leeeezze! THIS IS NOT GERMANY, IT IS NOT HOLLAND, AND I SEE NO REASON WHATSOEVER THAT WE SHOULD ASPIRE TO BE JUST LIKE THEM. Who CARES if the US beats Holland or Germany? What possible meaningfulness or positive outcome does that hold for the well-being of our horses, our families, our country, or the world? How does that make our world any better? Why is it important for the US to be at the “top” of horse sports? Oh, yeah, I remember–one thing it has done is make people look for more ways to cheat by drugging and abusing (sharp things in boots, killing horses for money, finding “untestable” performance-enhancing substances) their horses.
I think the Olympics is a money-grubbing, political, elitist pile of horse poop. Big frickin’ deal which country wins in the Equestrian events. Sure, it’s fun to watch our riders compete and I, as a psychologist, am very interested in the human motivation and resulting fulfillment when one does well. I am sure it is an unforgettable experience for those who compete. HOWEVER, it has become a game of who has the most money and sponsors and is willing to subject his/her horse to the stress that is now being recognized by some top riders, who are electing to NOT go to Hong Kong. And don’t get me started on that…
GOOD FOR THOSE WHO ARE NOT GOING!
Just leave me alone and let me make my own decisions about my horse and my riding.
There. I’m done. For now.
Oh, and another thing–piaffegirl–this will not be passed in July because it is not going to be voted on in July. It will be voted on in January 2009. But please do stay involved.
I think the Olympics would be a lot better if there were no medal counts, and if people took off their national outfit and put away their flags and put on an olympic uniform when they arrived, and if the results were announced with the athlete’s names, not their country. I want to see sport, not p****** matches between countries.
[QUOTE=piaffegirl;2938277]
I didn’t know you replied to my call thru a post, I have read and reread many threads, and it’s quite obvious I missed yours. I am new to all this BB etique and so I apologize.
I want to thank you for responding and in my earlier post on this thread, want to know what I can do now to protrect my right to ride at any level. I would love to get involved in anyway so as to make sure this doesn’t get passed in July.
Again, sorry Jennifer.[/QUOTE]
No problem, Racheal! Funny thing is that I ASSUMED (we know it’s bad to assume…hehe) that you read my post because I thought I saw you post again on the same thread the next day! However, it wasn’t you, it was PiaffeDREAMS that posted! oops. The thread was the one entitled, “DressageDaily article re rule change proposal”. You posted on the 9th, I responded on the 10th and Piaffe Dreams posted on the 11th. I just saw “Piaffe” and thought it was Piaffe “Girl”.
Anyway, the best way to get involved is to do what folks are doing…stay informed and make your voice heard.
It is my opinion that some sort of system WILL be put into place (based on the tone of things that I heard at the USDF convention). I am just hoping that the “powers-that-be” will come up with something that is reasonably attainable for those who live in remote areas with shows that are few and far between or those who choose to show only two or three times a year at the USDF/USEF rec. shows.
Jennifer
[QUOTE=rebecca yount;2938330]
One of my biggest complaints about the whole frickin’ “qualifying criteria” documents that have been passed around is the statement “Based on existing European models”. I sincerely hope that the motivation for the whole hoo hah mess is our horses’ well-being and NOT becoming a world dressage power.
Puh-leeeezze! THIS IS NOT GERMANY, IT IS NOT HOLLAND, AND I SEE NO REASON WHATSOEVER THAT WE SHOULD ASPIRE TO BE JUST LIKE THEM. Who CARES if the US beats Holland or Germany? What possible meaningfulness or positive outcome does that hold for the well-being of our horses, our families, our country, or the world? How does that make our world any better?[/QUOTE]
This reminds me of the current COTH Between the Rounds With Denny Emerson. He figured the massive changes to eventing were made for one (1) rider out of one thousand – or 25 riders total for the entire 25,000 membership.
Emerson goes on to suggest a two-track or three track system with USEF where aspiring international riders can do their thing without screwing it up (my words not Emerson’s) for everyone else. “Four Issues That Dominated 2007,” January 11, 2008 COTH Issue http://www.chronofhorse.com/index.php?cat=23007043187207&ShowArticle_ID=1331001083353308
Something for the USEF to think about. Maybe the GMOs can join/unite both problems and put THAT on the table. After all, and I’m sure I’m preaching to the choir now, there are many CTAs listed in the USDF GMOs http://www.usdf.org/clubs/list.asp?TypePass=GMO
I was just thinking of that this morning. The USEF/USDF already have the “High Performance” type classes, maybe they could expand on that?
Have one type of classes for ammies who have no delusions of going for the Olympics and another type, the HP classes, for those wanting to go for the Olympic/World Cup/Pan Am type of thing.
I did some quick math. I took the results as posted on the USDF website for all dressage competitions from 10/1/07 to present, in Region 1 (my region) and Region 5 (Janet Brown-Foy’s region–since she is the one that made the comment about scores in the 30s). I think it is important to look at all results for all regions but I don’t have time to do that right now.
In Region 1, there were 2260 total rides during that time period. Scores reported are as follows:
Scores in the 30s–2--0.08% of total
Scores in the 40s–37–1.6% of total
Scores in the 50s–783–34.6% of total
Scores in the 60s–1326–58.67% of total
Scores in the 70s–105–4.6% of total
In Region 5, there were 773 total rides during that time period. Scores reported are as follows:
Scores in the 30s–0--0% of the total
Scores in the 40s–9--1.2% of the total
Scores in the 50s–242–31.3% of the total
Scores in the 60s–483–62.49% of the total
Scores in the 70s–27–3.4% of the total
To summarize, it looks like a tiny fraction of a percent of rides for those two regions for that time period score in the 30s. Most score in the 60s (by far), next comes scores in the 50s with again a tiny fraction in the 40s. Only about 4-5% of rides score in the 70s.
Much more work needs to be done in analyzing the data, like including other regions and adding data from shows as it becomes available. But it was not hard to do.
I think THIS is the kind of information that is needed, along with which judges are giving 30s, and where those scores are being found.
Interesting. Are those status for ALL levels, or are they for Third Level (which was the level Janet F-B was referring to)?
I assume the stats are for all levels, but am curious about the percentages at Third in particular.
Rebecca,
Interesting. Another point to consider would be if the 30-40% riders
continued to show receiving the same scores.
Maybe, it was a one-time :eek: ride, and the rest of the season was in the 60% range?
OR
Maybe, the scoring system actually works and the 30-40% riders dropped back a level/or stayed home to get additional training?
They are for all levels but I put them into an Excel spreadsheet so I can sort by level. Just a minute.
Also, I did it for Region 2. In that Region, there were 465 total rides so far, with the following results:
30s–0 rides–0% of total
40s–4 rides–0.8% of total
50s–134 rides–28.8% of total
60s–300 rides–64.5% of total
70s–21 rides–4.5% of total
wow rebecca – you’re good
Yes, I am, thank you–and I have a helper who is even better. She and I will get going on this within the next few days. After we get the info loaded into our database, we can run get all sorts of statistics related to this issue and use them to present our case more effectively.
And my kid got my genes: She has been accepted to vet school at Ohio State, and has interviews at: UPenn combined VMD/Ph.D. program; Tufts vet school and Ph.D. program; Harvard Ph.D. program; Johns Hopkins Ph.D. program. Waiting to hear from Wisconsin vet school, VaTech, vet school and MIT Ph.D. program.
Now back to our regularly scheduled program.
WOW, Rebecca. Thanks. There was a fun post earlier on this or another thread that owned-up to having a truly low score in a FL show when her horse misbehaved badly, then went on to score in the 60s in her other classes. Who hasn’t suffered a bad class? Although I’ve never scored below 50% (yet, thank goodness), I have had classes where – mare ran backward at X (after seeing scary judge) and another where (same) mare tried to jump the puddles in the very soggy ring and another where she tried to jump shafts of light in an indoor ring. I like to think that those classes were not representative of the mare’s ability or my riding capabilities under more normal circumstances (all made me laugh at the time, however).
So, particulary since there are SO few low scores being uncovered by Rebecca’s number-crunching, perhaps this BB can help collect (if anyone is willing to own up) other such examples to explain-away dramatically low scores that may be misused by the USEF Dressage Committee to impose a bad new rule? Any volunteers to offer data/explanations for this good cause?
I’ve seen a local trainer get poor scores consistently at GP on a client’s horse – the client is the driving force in putting the horse in those classes, not the trainer
horse is not stressed or harmed by the riding - it’s just not really a GP horse and that is evident in the scores - trainer doesn’t push horse, they just muddle through
Actually the data in posts 88 and 91 show roughly one-third of all riders under 60% – so I see where that ties in or even supports the concept of achieving a minimum score of 58%, scores of 58% or higher would be given points, with rider needing x-amount of points to proceed further.
Not that I’m for this idea, I think it’s the wrong “solution” on many levels.
I like the posts earlier asking for the Third Level and above breakdown of the numbers instead of lumping all riders together – and also all Claire’s questions in post 90 to further break down data.
I’ll own up… I rode 1st level and got a 49% from an S judge (back in 2002) J Ashton Moore… Found a new trainer in 2003, went back to training level, qualified for champs w/ consistently 60+ scores, moved to 1st level, made consistently 60+ scores, then at 2nd level (mare started having age related arthritis problems) got 59 & 60 %… (between 2003 and 2006) [this was an older anglo/arab mare who was ridden consistently in double bridle to horrible scores by previous owner - and mare’s mind was blown until I found the new trainer in 2003]
Some riders do listen to scores and retrench… in my case I figured out that my trainer sucked, I sucked, and I needed to find someone better - I did, and we don’t suck so much anymore!
Ya know, I got a 48 once. Willem halted at X and shot into reverse, and I made the mistake of laughing. He backed in this perfect tiny figure eight at top speed, all by himself, then halted squarely again and off we went. Then he saw my mom, began crying, whinnied piteously the entire test, bucked through all the canter work, and crowhopped through some of the trot movements. I should have just excused myself after the lovely figure eight, but was having so much fun with his antics that I rode through the whole test anyhow.
Sadly, I do not have a video of this. I would have given my eyeteeth to have this on video. It was truly Willem in all his “This it be wrong” glory. :lol:
by sm
Actually the data in posts 88 and 91 show roughly one-third of all riders under 60% – so I see where that ties in or even supports the concept of achieving a minimum score of 58%, scores of 58% or higher would be given points, with rider needing x-amount of points to proceed further.
I think this shows how two people can look at the same data and come to two different conclusions.
I see 1/3 of all rides under 60% and think those rides were probably early season or move-up rides or the AA who just likes to show occasionally for social enjoyment. Perhaps an occasional poor behavior ride.The 60% and above I would tend to think are later in the year rides, confirmed-horse and rider or pros and serious ammies. Especially the 70% rides.
I don’t see where there appears to be any pressing need for qualifications just because there are some 50-59% rides. There are so few(sometimes none) 30-49% rides they are negligible.
Please note that the following was done rather quickly so there may be some minor errors, which need to, obviously, be corrected before this is presented formally. But:
Okay, I had to cut out the number of rides per region in each score category, but here are the percentages, for all shows in all regions where results are posted on the USEF website (this is 10/07 through 11/07, approximately). Numbers are rounded, quickly done, and there were some rides at each show that were young horse tests so had scores like 6.4, etc. so I didn’t put those in the calcs.
Editing here: I noticed that when it went on the BB it got hammered, so I’ll interpret. I think examining the totals is interesting. Only 0.02% of ALL RIDES nNATIONWIDE scored in the 30s, 1.8% were in the 40s, 33.5% were in the 50s, 59.5% were in the 60s, 4.7% were in the 70s. There was one score in the 80s but it was a sport horse breed score of some kind so I didn’t include it.
Many of the scores included in the below calculations were from Regional Championships. In Region 6 there were no scores reported so far. Some regions have many small shows (with 15 or 20 rides total!). Many regions have shows that only have one judge.
% of total rides in all shows in each score range
Reg 30s % 40s % 50s % 60s % 70s % Total Rides
1 0.08 1.6 34.6 58.67 4.6 2260
2 0 0.8 28.8 64.5 4.5 465
3 0 1.4 31 59.66 7.3 1490
4 0 1.9 38 54.97 4.76 713
5 0 1.2 31.3 62.49 3.4 773
6 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 1.3 28 65 4.8 1667
8 0 2.4 35.9 57.76 2.9 206
9 0 2.8 41.5 52.9 2.7 1351
Totals 0.02 1.8 33.5 59.5 4.7 8925
Interesting to note that in ALL regions for this time period there were only TWO (2) rides which scored in the 30s. There were 162 rides which scored in the 40s.
I haven’t had time to calculate how many judges total were represented, or how many judges scored in which ranges. I can say that Janet Brown-Foy was represented at one show during this time period, and that was in Region 9. Of the 38 rides in that Region which scored in the 40s, 5 of those rides were influenced (either as a single judge or on a panel) by Ms. Brown-Foy. Also, of the 37 rides in Region 9 which scored in the 70s, Ms. Brown-Foy was involved in 7 of the rides as either a single judge or on a panel. She was not involved in either of the two rides (both of those in Region 1) which scored in the 30s. Those two rides (38.667 and 39.211) were on an Oldenburg and a Dutch Warmblood and the judges were (one for each ride) Renate Lansburgh and Janine Malone.
I haven’t examined the data for the 40% range rides yet in that much detail.
But there is a LOT of information out there!
PS This is only data and we can’t draw conclusions like WHY the rides scored like they did based on what is here. So who knows–but I can tell you that these shows were from October 1 to November 30–so they were not early season rides in the sense of being in the spring when most show seasons start. But some were early season for Wellington…I guess you could look at it that way.
I love statistics!
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use