I watched Isabel Werth ride and I was shocked to see she got a 78%?? Her horse had a big spook. I am a Hunter/Jumper rider and I don’t know much about Dressage but shouldn’t she have been penalized heavily for that spook??? It must be politics I guess because I don’t understand it. Can someone explain? Thanks.
I’ve noticed that everytime I’ve seen them compete. I ask the same question… Then, pine for the days when the curb rein was rarely used.
Seb 
The scoring def. reminds me of the eurovision song contests
Dutchmike, I think you’ll find that the eurovision song contest has more relevance (if you’re Dutch you’ll get the irony).
translation for the language challenged.
[QUOTE]De dressuurjurering ligt na afloop van de Olympische Spelen zwaar onder vuur.
The dressage judges are lying in a big floppy heap, black and blue from the olympic games
Na protest vanuit onder meer het Amerikaanse en het Nederlandse kamp heeft de FEI het besluit genomen om het jureringssysteem van de dressuur te onderzoeken, meldt Horses.nl-correspondent Fabian Brockötter. Vooral over de beoordelingswijze van de voorzitter van de jury, het Duitse jurylid Gotthilf Riexinger, zijn veel klachten.
a protest van full of american and dutch campers hope the FEI slay the gnomes from the jury says …(name withheld for legal reasons)… for all the oversitter in the jury the …(name also withheld for legal reasons but he’s german)…sins very a lot.
Na de Grand Prix Spécial vond een ontmoeting plaats tussen de jury en een aantal deelnemende landen over het uitdelen van punten. Teammanager Mariëtte Sanders en KNHS-topsportdirecteur George de Jong representeerden Nederland. In eerste instantie was vooral Nederland kritisch over met name de jurering van Riexinger.In the gP special all the people from everywhere had the wrong points. people with important job titles agreed. A whole country didn’t want one judge. Eigen nieuws horses.nl en hier geknipt en geplakt van horses.nl
Het Amerikaanse kamp wakkerde het vuur verder aan, ook zij hadden vooral problemen met het Duitse jurylid.The american campers agreed this german was a problem. ,“Hoe kan het dat een klein foutje van Steffen Peters zwaar wordt gestraft, terwijl Werth ondanks een grove fout in de piaffe zo hoog eindigt?”, vragen de Amerikanen zich af. Steffen Peters had a small problem with a hoe, Isabelle had a problem with a hog - surely one is much more problematic than the other the american campers asked. ,“De proef van Isabell Werth heeft een hogere moeilijkheidsgraad dan de proef van Peters, daardoor kan ze toch een hogere score halen”, voert Riexinger ter verdediging aan, over de jurering van de kür op muziek. professor isabelle werths hog was higher than that of proffessor peters van halen said the german in the jury whilst looking for a cure.
__________________/QUOTE]
There that makes much more sense now.
[QUOTE=Fixerupper;3457445]
frenetic not energetic.[/QUOTE]
Good wording.
sorry, I’m confused
Could someone help me understand… I thought this meeting was held in the early hours of Monday morning, before the kur - so the complaint would be about the GPS scoring? Is this correct? If so, the German judge’s reasoning is that Satchmo had a higher caliber GPS test except for the piaffe and Ravel was not as good - therefore an bigger error for Satchmo counts less than a small error for Ravel, although it was the same test?? Maybe I’ve got confused and the meeting on Monday isn’t the same thing as this complaint?
I thought the judges were supposed to be scoring the movements as they SEE them - Isabell’s problem was in the Special. As far as the Keurs with mistakes - AGAIN - they should mark what they see - not relative to what the other riders tests were like. It stinks when it becomes obvious from the placings - that ONE judge was clearly focused on how the riders would be placed relative to each other and NOT scoring the rides in front of him.
[QUOTE=fiona;3458158]
De dressuurjurering ligt na afloop van de Olympische Spelen zwaar onder vuur.
The dressage judges are lying in a big floppy heap, black and blue from the olympic games
Na protest vanuit onder meer het Amerikaanse en het Nederlandse kamp heeft de FEI het besluit genomen om het jureringssysteem van de dressuur te onderzoeken, meldt Horses.nl-correspondent Fabian Brockötter. Vooral over de beoordelingswijze van de voorzitter van de jury, het Duitse jurylid Gotthilf Riexinger, zijn veel klachten.
a protest van full of american and dutch campers hope the FEI slay the gnomes from the jury says …(name withheld for legal reasons)… for all the oversitter in the jury the …(name also withheld for legal reasons but he’s german)…sins very a lot.
Na de Grand Prix Spécial vond een ontmoeting plaats tussen de jury en een aantal deelnemende landen over het uitdelen van punten. Teammanager Mariëtte Sanders en KNHS-topsportdirecteur George de Jong representeerden Nederland. In eerste instantie was vooral Nederland kritisch over met name de jurering van Riexinger.In the gP special all the people from everywhere had the wrong points. people with important job titles agreed. A whole country didn’t want one judge. Eigen nieuws horses.nl en hier geknipt en geplakt van horses.nl
Het Amerikaanse kamp wakkerde het vuur verder aan, ook zij hadden vooral problemen met het Duitse jurylid.The american campers agreed this german was a problem. ,“Hoe kan het dat een klein foutje van Steffen Peters zwaar wordt gestraft, terwijl Werth ondanks een grove fout in de piaffe zo hoog eindigt?”, vragen de Amerikanen zich af. Steffen Peters had a small problem with a hoe, Isabelle had a problem with a hog - surely one is much more problematic than the other the american campers asked. ,“De proef van Isabell Werth heeft een hogere moeilijkheidsgraad dan de proef van Peters, daardoor kan ze toch een hogere score halen”, voert Riexinger ter verdediging aan, over de jurering van de kür op muziek. professor isabelle werths hog was higher than that of proffessor peters van halen said the german in the jury whilst looking for a cure.
__________________/QUOTE]
There that makes much more sense now.
What’s a “hoe” and a “hog”?
Does anyone have a link to the actual test scores, not just the total?
Its such a shame that a beautiful sport suffers from this type of pre-planned judging. I live in Canada and the Olympic programing that I watched had running commentary by an Olympic qualified dressage judge, she also disagreed with some of the marks, (as she is entitled because its HER opinion she was giving). However, few comments were made when the last 5 were in the ring, seemed obvious what the final outcome would be.
Some of her other comments really concerned me however, such as that some of the riders would not do well as the judges have not often seen them ride in competition. WTF, arn’t they supposed to be judging what is in front of them NOW, not what the horse did last year? If the judges allow that type of bias, why don’t each of the competitors ride the test at home, over and over and over, until each movement is as good as it can be and then send an edited tape to the jury panel to judge? That would make as much sense! I think its absurd that you give someone higher marks who makes a major mistake because their test is more difficult, than someone with an easier test with a minor mistake. Are you not judging each element! No wonder dressage is laughed at by the general public, reminds me of ice-skating a few years ago
What’s a “hoe” and a “hog”?
Steffen had difficulties with his farm implement and Isabel had an issue with a bacon producing quadruped.
http://results.beijing2008.cn/WRM/ENG/INF/EQ/C77D/EQX001100.shtml#EQX001101
For individual marks in each test click on the + sign beside each name.
bevs_stuff, what you are commenting on is the old controversy about the need for serious competitors to campaign in Euroland. The theory is, if judges have seen the horse a number of times before they will be mroe likely to give it the benefit of the doubt if they are wavering between a 7 and 8 (for example) in their heads… if they have seen several past performances they will have an idea of the horse’s true training/ability and this can work in competitors’ favour. It’s not something I like, but it’s also not exactly corrupt - sometimes it is difficult to decide the mark when there are so many factors to consider. Minor signs of faults might be taken less seriously if it is clear from past performances that the horse has a history of correctness and ability.
Fiona, I thought it was physically impossible to choke on a slice of mango, but your post just about made me do it. Hilarious, thank you.
C’mon, peeps, it’s dressage. Surely nobody’s surprised that it’s subjective?
See, this is why showjumping is so cool. The pole is up…or the pole is down. I’ve never heard a judge say “it could be more up”, or put a comment at the end like “the poles show promise, I’m sure more will remain up at your next show”
THAT is more a question of the scoring. I suggest you download a couple of score sheets and play around with the numbers.
You can overcome even a “0” by scoring 1 point more than the other guy in other places.
A rider with 19 scores of 8 and one score of 0 will get a 76%.
A rider with 20 scores of 7 will get a 70%.
Now, you could argue that the 8s are political. But the fact that a single major error can be overcome by being a little bit better everywhere else is just the naure of the way dressage is scored.
Fiona
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
[QUOTE=egontoast;3458241]
Steffen had difficulties with his farm implement and Isabel had an issue with a bacon producing quadruped.[/QUOTE]
I just snorted coffee on my keyboard :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
[QUOTE=Janet;3458272]
THAT is more a question of the scoring. I suggest you download a couple of score sheets and play around with the numbers.
You can overcome even a “0” by scoring 1 point more than the other guy in other places.
A rider with 19 scores of 8 and one score of 0 will get a 76%.
A rider with 20 scores of 7 will get a 70%.
Now, you could argue that the 8s are political. But the fact that a single major error can be overcome by being a little bit better everywhere else is just the naure of the way dressage is scored.[/QUOTE]
The problem with this is the belief that a horse can go from a 0 score for one movement on to an 8 for the next. I find this inconceivable. Sure, if the 0 is because the rider failed to attempt the movement, but not if the horse failed to execute it. Intense resistance is usually carried on into the next movements and it is the failure to see tension except when wilfully exhibited that I find hard to comprehend.
IIRC, Steffen has had continued problems with his “farm implement” as shown in several past photos. 
(a horse can’t get a low score on one movement without deserving a low score on the next one)
Bats79, if you had watched the test with an eye not blinded by preconceived notions, you would have seen that that is EXACTLY what happened. The horse went on performing after that moment as if nothing had happened. Isabel rode the rest of the test very conservatively, with out asking for the maximum performance, to avoid any further problem.
I actually think that what happened was that Satchmo stepped on himself. It happened in the GP, the GP special, and in the freestyle. He moves very close behind, and a correctly moving horse piaffes with his hind legs close together - closer together, often, than in other movements.
In the first class, I saw him step on himself in the GP and kick out a tiny bit, very unemotionally, and just go on, but I think it bothered him and he remembered it - Isabel herself said he’s very touchy, and that hurts alot even if it doesn’t draw blood. It really stings.
I think it just got worse every subsequent ride. He is a very long legged horse and he can easily clip himself in piaffe, and it would hurt like hell. He didn’t really look resistant to his rider or fresh, not being nasty or mean or anything like that.
I found Kerri’s Blog very interesting yesterday and today. It answers some questions that I had about things I saw on the live feed.
I find the “BELL” thing very interesting.
