Dressage jury under fire, FEI says they will investigate

[Maude]

Puts things back in perspective (sp?)

After reading the GP, Special and Freestyle threads blow by blow (I can barely open my email with my pathetic dial up service out here in the country, let along get live feed)-and I have no cable or dish…I actually feel better about my own personal riding accomplishments and goals. The true purpose of “dressage” has been lost along the way somewhere. Klimke said that the purpose of dressage is to make the horse more beautiful. Dressage evolved from the quest for a better trained, more athletic horse. Read the collective marks. Seems that the judging is overlooking harmony, relaxation, etc. for what they consider “brilliant”. To me there is no brilliance without the subtlty of aids, harmony between horse and rider, etc. Tension is not part of the desired picture or training scale. In the future, when I compete, I will strive for the perfection and beauty of the partnership, the invisible aids, the "horse seeming to perform of his own will, etc. Won’t really matter how those judges that reward brilliance over correctness score me. All this crap puts things in a different light (for me) and I will so enjoy the journey that much more. I’m not great at putting things into words, but hope that I have made my point.

[freestyle2music]

Please take in consideration

Since I have made many video’s and DVD’s for the judge exams I know that there are very many grey-areas. In casu areas where the FEI guidelines don’t give a clear answer for the judges. And in this case it all comes down to personal interpretation of the judges.

For example the Pa-Pi-Pa movements : You have a mark for the passage, for the piaffe and for the transitions. When a horse don’t perform the piaffe the judging should be a ZERO. However when a Piaffe is not shown also the transitions are not shown. Some judges will give both movements a ZERO and others will only give the Piaffe a ZERO.
Next to this, the marks for harmony between horse and rider (coef 4) should be inflicted.

In a freestyle to music it’s even more difficult, because riders can decide to repeat the movements which went wrong. The jury must add the scores of these movements and divide it by the # of times performed. Let’s take for example the PA-PI-PA tour. Initial score 8.0.8 transitions 0. The second time the rider performed the same PA-PI-PA tour with scores 8.9.8 transitions 9. So the finals results on the scoresheets are PA = 8 , Piaffe = 5 or 4 and transitions 5 or 4 (depending on the mood of the judges :lol::lol:).

Having said all this: To me it’s very obvious that the judging in HongKong was a disaster, but I also know/feel that lack of firm guidelines from the FEI are the reason for this.

Theo

[Stubborn_Mare]

[QUOTE=Bats79;3458307]
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.[/QUOTE]

Watch the ride.

[AM1]

I understand the call to throw out the high and low scores but I can’t figure out where to place the judges to make that a viable option. In skating and gymnastics the judges all sit fairly close together along one side. They give only one score at the end which it appears they punch into a computer themselves. So there are what five or seven people sitting in a row? Multiply that by three to allow for the judges, written scribe, computer scribe, and add the timer and we have to place 16 to 22 people around the ring in such a way that they are all seeing the same performance and are far enough apart to not have their marks overheard or influenced by another judge.

[DuffyAgain]

Loved Kerri’s blog! Thanks for posting!

[petitefilly]

[QUOTE=Eclectic Horseman;3456819]
As a few of us noticed after watching the selection trials videos, Courtney’s music was uninspired and did nothing to enhance the ride. If anything, it made it feel even more boring and conservative than it was. I haven’t looked at the scores to compare the aesthetic to the technical, but if I had to find fault, that is where it would be.[/QUOTE]

Not that it matters, but a funeral would be better for Courtney’s music. As a non dressage rider noted beside me. “This music sucks.” So much for buying a choreographed personal score! :):):):)

Frankly, Andreas had the best music. He uses it with two different horses too! You have to get the audience involved, having music you can relate to does that. Even if you pick elevator versions of music, it still has a better over all relationship to your viewer. Music that sounds like it is background, or measured to your horse with a dull thud will make you tune out, and make the viewer look around for more interesting stimulus. IE: not you and your horse!

MHO dressage kurs are in need of revamping. If you want an audience to like you, or if you even want an audience so you can make the sport more endearing to the public you need more interesting choreographed rides. Sorry, classic aficionados, we need something!

[Sannois]

Well Said

[QUOTE=Maude;3458372]
After reading the GP, Special and Freestyle threads blow by blow (I can barely open my email with my pathetic dial up service out here in the country, let along get live feed)-and I have no cable or dish…I actually feel better about my own personal riding accomplishments and goals. The true purpose of “dressage” has been lost along the way somewhere. Klimke said that the purpose of dressage is to make the horse more beautiful. Dressage evolved from the quest for a better trained, more athletic horse. Read the collective marks. Seems that the judging is overlooking harmony, relaxation, etc. for what they consider “brilliant”. To me there is no brilliance without the subtlty of aids, harmony between horse and rider, etc. Tension is not part of the desired picture or training scale. In the future, when I compete, I will strive for the perfection and beauty of the partnership, the invisible aids, the "horse seeming to perform of his own will, etc. Won’t really matter how those judges that reward brilliance over correctness score me. All this crap puts things in a different light (for me) and I will so enjoy the journey that much more. I’m not great at putting things into words, but hope that I have made my point.[/QUOTE]
It seems to be sadly missing in alot of todays upper level tests.

[petitefilly]

[QUOTE=egontoast;3458241]
Steffen had difficulties with his farm implement and Isabel had an issue with a bacon producing quadruped.[/QUOTE]

OHMYGOD!!! :):):):):)

Sweet Jesus, Steffen could stick that implement up a German’s tuckus, and Isabell could throw him in a pan of frying oil. 'Nuff said!

:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)

[Coreene]

More Fire from da Yanks

De Nederlanders waren al bekend met de grillige beoordelingen van de Duitster Gotthilf Riexinger. De Amerikanen hebben gisteren in de afsluitende Kür kennisgemaakt met de juryvoorzitter. In deze Kür gaf de Duitser als enige de als vierde geëindigde Amerikaan Steffen Peters geen top drie plaats. Waar de vier overige juryleden hem zowel voor het artistieke als technische gedeelte een derde of soms zelfs tweede plaats gaven, kwam Riexinger niet verder dan een zesde plek voor het technische en zelfs een negende voor het artistieke gedeelte. Het uiteindelijke verschil tussen de bronzen medaillewinnares Kemmer en nummer vier Peters bedroeg slechts 0,305%. Na afloop in de persconferentie kreeg de Duitsers een aantal vragen vanuit het Amerikaanse kamp, maar toonde hij zich nogmaals onvermurwbaar.

Roughly translated, the Dutch already knew ol’ Gotthilf was a tool. Now the Americans have been introduced to His Toolness as well.

[freestyle2music]

[QUOTE=Coreene;3459182]
De Nederlanders waren al bekend met de grillige beoordelingen van de Duitster Gotthilf Riexinger. De Amerikanen hebben gisteren in de afsluitende Kür kennisgemaakt met de juryvoorzitter. In deze Kür gaf de Duitser als enige de als vierde geëindigde Amerikaan Steffen Peters geen top drie plaats. Waar de vier overige juryleden hem zowel voor het artistieke als technische gedeelte een derde of soms zelfs tweede plaats gaven, kwam Riexinger niet verder dan een zesde plek voor het technische en zelfs een negende voor het artistieke gedeelte. Het uiteindelijke verschil tussen de bronzen medaillewinnares Kemmer en nummer vier Peters bedroeg slechts 0,305%. Na afloop in de persconferentie kreeg de Duitsers een aantal vragen vanuit het Amerikaanse kamp, maar toonde hij zich nogmaals onvermurwbaar.

Roughly translated, the Dutch already knew ol’ Gotthilf was a tool. Now the Americans have been introduced to His Toolness as well.[/QUOTE]

But Coreene when you translate Riexinger’s firstname, you should know that he was send and guided by God, so he couldn’t have done anything wrong.

Theo

[Coreene]

@freestyle2music;3459255

But Coreene when you translate Riexinger’s firstname, you should know that he was send and guided by God, so he couldn’t have done anything wrong.

Theo

:lol: :lol: :lol: Lucifer? Veel beter!

[BridalBridle]

The FEI is going to look into it. So why not get the PTA to do it. You’ll get the same result. NOTHING.

[Fixerupper]

@Coreene;3459182

De Nederlanders waren al bekend met de grillige beoordelingen van de Duitster Gotthilf Riexinger. De Amerikanen hebben gisteren in de afsluitende Kür kennisgemaakt met de juryvoorzitter. In deze Kür gaf de Duitser als enige de als vierde geëindigde Amerikaan Steffen Peters geen top drie plaats. Waar de vier overige juryleden hem zowel voor het artistieke als technische gedeelte een derde of soms zelfs tweede plaats gaven, kwam Riexinger niet verder dan een zesde plek voor het technische en zelfs een negende voor het artistieke gedeelte. Het uiteindelijke verschil tussen de bronzen medaillewinnares Kemmer en nummer vier Peters bedroeg slechts 0,305%. Na afloop in de persconferentie kreeg de Duitsers een aantal vragen vanuit het Amerikaanse kamp, maar toonde hij zich nogmaals onvermurwbaar.

Fiona PLEASE translate this one as well…please,please
(I’m still howling at the first one!!!)

[Beezer]

[QUOTE=Coreene;3459182]

Roughly translated, the Dutch already knew ol’ Gotthilf was a tool. Now the Americans have been introduced to His Toolness as well.[/QUOTE]

Clearly, this tool is the hoe that Steffan had so much trouble with. And you know what happens to troublesome garden implements, don’t you? Why, in the middle of the night, the gnomes take the bad hoes out to the woodshed and separate their heads from their shafts.

Hence the phrase “getting shafted.”

[Coreene]

@Beezer;3459560

Hence the phrase “getting shafted.”

Well, they don’t call him Stiffy for nuthin’.

[freestyle2music]

Translation

The Dutch had already some experiences with the strange judging of Riexinger. The USA yesterday found this out for themselves during the freestyle to music finals. In these finals the German judge Riexinger was the only judge who didn’t place Steffen Peters in the top three. While the other four judges placed Steffen both technical and artistical at place 2 and 3. Riexinger decided to give Steffen place 6 and place 9. The difference between bronze (Heike Kemmer) and Steffen was only 0.305%. At the press-conference after the freestyle to music, Riexinger got a lot of questions from the American journalists, however he kept his back straight and was very stubern in his answers.

De Nederlanders waren al bekend met de grillige beoordelingen van de Duitster Gotthilf Riexinger. De Amerikanen hebben gisteren in de afsluitende Kür kennisgemaakt met de juryvoorzitter. In deze Kür gaf de Duitser als enige de als vierde geëindigde Amerikaan Steffen Peters geen top drie plaats. Waar de vier overige juryleden hem zowel voor het artistieke als technische gedeelte een derde of soms zelfs tweede plaats gaven, kwam Riexinger niet verder dan een zesde plek voor het technische en zelfs een negende voor het artistieke gedeelte. Het uiteindelijke verschil tussen de bronzen medaillewinnares Kemmer en nummer vier Peters bedroeg slechts 0,305%. Na afloop in de persconferentie kreeg de Duitsers een aantal vragen vanuit het Amerikaanse kamp, maar toonde hij zich nogmaals onvermurwbaar.