Deduction in Points for Adding in Lines at Rated Show?

[Prime_Time_Rider]

I recently showed my horse at a USEF ‘A’ rated show in a hunter division. My trainer and I decided that it would be best for me to be conservative and add a stride in each line due to a problem I experienced earlier in the week on course. I realized that by adding a stride I would most likely sacrifice my chances of winning, but it was the best decision for me and my horse. Despite doing the adds, I placed very consistently in the middle of the pack in each class.

My question, is there a standard number of points that judges typically deduct for rounds in which the horse (excluding ponies, of course) consistently adds a stride down each line? Other than the adds our rounds were very solid, with no chips, late lead changes or other obvious faults. I received the exact same score in both rounds of the classic, which tells me that the judges were most likely deducting the same number of points each round for the adds. Both rounds were very consistent in pace and flowed nicely with no chips, no late lead changes and no obvious errors.

This isn’t a case of sour grapes as I knew going in that I would be most likely sacrificing points by choosing to add a stride down each line. I would be curious to hear from judges especially if they deduct a standard number of points for not doing the numbers.

[mroades]

Depends on the judge and depends on the division.

[Prime_Time_Rider]

The divisions were unrated (2’6" - 2’ 9") but at a rated show.

[inca]

I would be interested in hearing from judges re: this also. It was my understanding that other than Long Stirrup, you would not ribbon at an A show, doing the add. I have a horse that does not have the biggest stride. We can make the numbers but boy would I love to have the option of doing the add. We can put in a very nice, consistent round doing the add. (We can also do a nice round doing the numbers but I have to be sure to start off with the correct, forward pace.)

[SeedsPlease]

I think most judges reward consistency in a round. The horse that jumps the best with the correct number of strides will win, but the horse that is consistent has a chance of pinning depending on entries and the level of the division. It sounds like your horse had consistent rounds, and it was rewarded

[gottagrey]

the op might have added but had a more consistent trip(s) and other riders might have had a missed lead, missed distance - too long/chipped, dropped rails, off course, refusal - so it would be up to the judge to decide which penalty they felt was greater.

[Prime_Time_Rider]

Yes, I agree, but we know that dropping a rail is a 40 or 50 point deduction ( I can’t remember which). So dropping a rail or having a refusal is obviously a bigger sin than adding a stride in each line. My question is it totally up to the judge how points he or she decides to deduct for consistently adding a stride in each line? Since my scores were identical in both classic rounds and the trips were equally consistent (I was a little weak to the first fence in round 2, but I’m being picky), it appears that the judge deducted the same number of points from score for the adds. I would love to know how many points were deducted.

[Ammy_Owner]

The scores are used by the judges to organize their card and place the class. So your 76 (random number) with an add was better than the trip with 2 chips that got a 75 but worse than the trip with the late lead that got a 77.

Generally speaking an add will keep you out of the ribbons but it depends on how everyone else was doing that day.

[Prime_Time_Rider]

[QUOTE=Ammy Owner;7676111]
The scores are used by the judges to organize their card and place the class. So your 76 (random number) with an add was better than the trip with 2 chips that got a 75 but worse than the trip with the late lead that got a 77.

Generally speaking an add will keep you out of the ribbons but it depends on how everyone else was doing that day.[/QUOTE]

Yes, I know the scores are used by the judges to organize their card. My question is what is the usual, or standard number of points a judge will deduct for consistently adding a stride in each line.
For example, my friend at the same show received a score of 45 for her first classic round after she dropped a rail. So, one can assume that the judge deducted 40 points from her score for dropped rail.

[Night_Flight]

For the rails and refusals, it’s less of a deduction and more of an automatic score, usually of about 40. Slightly over 40 means a good round that the judge would like to place above a lesser round with a rail/refusal, and under 40 means either multiple rails/refusals or a bad round in general.

It’s up to each individual judge, though, and the division will also matter sometimes (so a safe add could be a minor mistake rather than a major mistake for a class below a certain height or with a certain level of rider).

[MHM]

[QUOTE=Night Flight;7676157]
For the rails and refusals, it’s less of a deduction and more of an automatic score, usually of about 40. Slightly over 40 means a good round that the judge would like to place above a lesser round with a rail/refusal, and under 40 means either multiple rails/refusals or a bad round in general.[/QUOTE]
I beg to differ.

With the “standard” scores for major errors (trot, rail down, refusal), usually the first person in the class to have the major error gets the standard score, then the others who commit the same error get slotted in above or below the first person, based on the judge’s preference.

Regarding the OP’s question, there is really no standard deduction among all judges for smoothly and consistently adding in all the lines. For some judges, their top score for that round might be a 70, for other judges it might be a 79, especially in an entry-level division. Either way, it might be a good enough score to get a ribbon, depending on the rest of the competition in that particular class.

To clarify, this is entirely different from only adding in some of the lines, not all of them, which reflects an inconsistent pace that usually gets a score in the 60s from most judges.

The score on its own is fairly meaningless anyway. As others have said, it’s just a way for the judge to keep track of his or her order of preference.

[Linny]

I’m not a judge but I’d guess that it’s somewhat discretionary. Clearly the judge wanted to reward the smoothness of the trip, good lead changes etc and the 8 nice jumps and being as it was a “modified” type division was willing to do so.

Some of the horses that made the numbers may have blown changes or jumped poorly pulled rails and the judge felt adding to a nice spot was a less egregious error. In some rings where the fences are set for the day and never moved and classes range from 2’3 to 3’ some judges will offer slack for the adds in lower heights. Firstly because the lines are really set for 3’ fences and secondly because lower height classes are often for less fancy type horses where “short stridedness” is more common.

It’s possible that after your first trip which the judge liked and scored an “X” he just assumed that another nearly exact trip should just be sored “X” as well.

[McGurk]

I think the fact that it was an unrated division, perhaps a schooling division, gave the judge a little more latititude and perhaps the quality of the other trips wasn’t great?

I have seen judges pin trips with an add in the SS, Green Ponies and in the Children’s, rarely in any other rated division. Unrated divisions? Just depends. I am inclined to think well of a judge who pinned your solid consistent trip with an add over a shakier trip that made the distances. May that trend continue!

[Mayaty02]

yeah its my understanding that there is not a standard deduction for adding, especially it you do it consistently around the course. i have even seen a rated pony class won by a small who add the whole way around the course, when the previous day it was clear this older pony no longer had the step to do the regular strides.

I would think in an unrated, schooling or modified type of class, there were alot of errors probably that were worse than your adding safely and consistently.

[REH]

Notwithstanding an otherwise consistent course, never add in a one or a two stride because you are doing the adds elsewhere. Those aren’t up for discussion.

[M_O_Connor]

[QUOTE=MHM;7676190]
I beg to differ.

With the “standard” scores for major errors (trot, rail down, refusal), usually the first person in the class to have the major error gets the standard score, then the others who commit the same error get slotted in above or below the first person, based on the judge’s preference.

Regarding the OP’s question, there is really no standard deduction among all judges for consistently adding in all the lines. For some judges, their top score for that round might be a 70, for other judges it might be a 79, especially in an entry-level division.

The score on its own is fairly meaningless anyway. As others have said, it’s just a way for the judge to keep track of his or her order of preference.[/QUOTE]

This is a very good explanation.

I certainly don’t use a ‘standard’ deduction, and every score is relative to all the other scores anyway.

[OveroHunter]

I’m very interested in this thread as well. I gave up on showing hunters with my paint gelding because he just didn’t have the stride to get down the lines unless we flat out galloped the course. We never placed very well when we did a nice consistent course of adds in every line or when we galloped down the lines and got the strides. Now we just play around in jumpers and I show by bigger mare in the hunters who has the stride for it.

I had a huge mare in high school who was 17.1 and all legs and could leave out a stride so beautifully that we would actually typically place decently.

[vxf111]

At a lower level show in a low level division, I put a round with the adds behind an equivalent round without the adds but ahead of the “next category” of errors.

So the best category are horses that get all the distances, get the numbers, go around with no errors. They are shuffled in order of best jumper/mover to worst within that group.

Next group has what I would call “small errors,” distances that didn’t quite fit/match but weren’t chips or superman distances either, lack of straightness, minor changes of pace throughout, stickiness off the ground, slightly late changes, etc. In that group, the ones that get the distances come before the ones that add.

The next group is more significant errors, chips/flyers, missed changes, etc. Again, the ones with the adds come after the ones with the distances.

And then there is the group of major faults-- and those folks generally aren’t getting a ribbon so I don’t bother making a lot of distinctions unless it’s clear I’m going to have to use some of them. If you trot on course or have a run out, for example, I stop worrying about whether you’re adding because you’re in the bottom group anyway.

At the low level shows I judge at, I don’t want to see anyone leaving out. If you are leaving out, you are scaring me. I don’t want to see anything scary. I’ll take messy all day long but I don’t want to see scary. If you’re showing 2’6 at 4H shows, horsemanship/suitability is part of the game. There is no reason why someone at that level should not be able to carry a suitable canter that will allow them to get the distance. If the horse is that large strided, it’s probably not suited for the division. I have yet to see one at these shows that is leaving out and looking good doing it, they generally are leaving out because they are racing. I’d rather see you add 2 than leave one out at that level. This is meant to be a bit of a stepping stone to larger heights… safety matters to me at that level.

So, at least for me, you could add and pin above someone who didn’t if the other person had more significant faults. I’d feel different if we were talking the A/O hunters or something-- but unrated under 3’0 type classes-- there are bound to be enough rounds with some type of non-superficial fault that a truly otherwise flawless round on a lovely horse whose only fault is to add could get a ribbon.

[hntrjmprpro45]

For me, I typically give scores in the 60s for adding in lines and in the 50s for adding in the in-and-out. Every judge is a little different but that is pretty normal (and what they teach at USEF judges clinics).

[whbar158]

In my experience it really depends on the judge, and the quality of adding. Are you having to hold and make the add work or does the horse have a nice relaxed just smaller canter. Also I see it greatly depend on what the division is I usually see judges be much more forgiving of adding in 2’6" and below whether that be a pre-child/adult class or just a schooling division. I have come across some judges that say they don’t count, they just watch the rhythm and consistency of the round so if a horse has a really nice add canter and consistent round the judge may not have noticed it was really adding (especially if the horse doesn’t have to crawl to add). Have also come across judges that count and will not pin you well if you add. These experiences have been at A shows, as well as local shows.
Personally (and yes this is coming from someone who had a horse with a shorter stride) I don’t think it should matter except for in and outs, how many strides you put if it otherwise looks smooth and relaxed. Sure a horse with a big flowing stride looks better and would still likely pin better even if the judge isn’t counting strides.
My horse actually could get the step with his forward canter, but it was too forward for today’s hunter ring with the bigger horses, not saying one is better than the other, just stating how it was. Did I wish that he wasn’t punished for his fowardness? Of course, but he wasn’t as well suited for the modern hunters, but I accepted that and tried not to complain (too much haha).