So, many of us compete against ourselves (I.e. Improving previous scores) but I’m curious about whether others interpret scores in relation to the others in the class. For example, I won a third level class in a small but rated show with a score of 59.7 There were seven in the class with scores from 54 to 58. My trainer says I did just fine but I’m not sure I like this way of thinking
What do you think? Tough judging or maybe the entire class was having a bad day?
I don’t think that’s something anyone can answer unless they were there that day.
[QUOTE=Magicboy;8872518]
… I won a third level class in a small but rated show with a score of 59.7 There were seven in the class with scores from 54 to 58. …
What do you think? Tough judging or maybe the entire class was having a bad day?[/QUOTE]
When everyone gets those scores then I think it’s just tough judging and that you should rely more on your trainer’s opinion (assuming your trainer is knowledgeable and aware).
It sucks to get a score that brings down our averages, from a tough judge, when we’ve had a clean ride and have improved over previous showings that earned higher scores. The “Better” ride gets a lower score. It’s just part of the subjectivity of the discipline we’re pursuing.
This just happened to me yesterday, too. I had the very best ride, ever, of my test, and for it I earned a score two points UNDER my median and more than seven full points less than the highest score I’ve previously gotten for the test, when I rode it worse. I know yesterday was my best, my trainer knows it was my best, but the judges never saw me ride it and don’t know where I came from and don’t know what I earned in the past doing it with more errors and less connection.
It’s just the nature of dressage showing. We need to find our real rewards inside ourselves, and in our progressive partnerships with the horses. Don’t over-analyze the scores, focus on the comments. And the next ride.
Very well-said, Silverbridge!!
[QUOTE=GraceLikeRain;8872532]
I don’t think that’s something anyone can answer unless they were there that day.[/QUOTE]
Agree with this.
I also tend to think:
40s and below: You or the judge are having a really bad day, or you need to move down a level
50s: You’re at the right level but you’re not quite there
60s: Respectable - keep working
70s: Great! Ready to move up if consistent.
80s and above: Time to move up.
Variables are the higher the level the lower the scores sometimes, and schooling shows sometimes being more generous.
For the most part, the percentages of course reflect the scale of scores.
Scale:
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]0 – Not Executed
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]6 – Satisfactory
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 295”]1 – Very Bad
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]7 – Fairly good
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 295”]2 – Bad
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]8 – Good
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 295”]3 – Fairly Bad
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]9 – Very Good
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 295”]4 – Insufficient
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]10 - Excellent
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 295”]5 - Sufficient
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Of course anything that leads to a ribbon could be deemed “excellent”! 
This happened to me a few years ago - I got a 54% - holy moly, I was devastated - I usually “judge” myself as I ride, and am usually tougher on the ride then the judge. I had guessed about 65% on the ride. Well, that was 2nd place in a big class - and it was a class with some really nice riders and horses. So I learned - sometimes a judge’s “scoring scale” is a little off. I think the judge was surprised at how low the scores were herself. It was the lowest score I’d ever had that wasn’t a “disaster ride” (I’ve had those rides where I was just relieved to survive and stay on :eek: aka disaster ride).
So - take a look at where you placed in the class, take a look at the overall scores by that judge on that day, and if you have video, go back and watch it with your trainer. And realize judges are human, and sometimes they just don’t have a good day.
Xanthoria is correct (except 5 is marginal, not sufficient), but sometimes the judges do get a little “off” on their scoring scale.
ETA - I think when you are scoring consistently mid 60s, AND feel like and the horse are consistent at the next level movements, you can move up. If you have a horse with “non-wow” gaits, 70s may be perpetually unachievable.
Agree with the above. I generally don’t look at the placings because if I’m showing I didn’t get to see the other rides and assess how they were in relation to mine. If I knew my test was solid and still scored low, and everyone else did as well then I’d just chalk it up to a tough judge
If the trainer said you did just fine, I would assume that he thought for your level of training right now, you did just fine… But I would still assume that there is some room for improvement… Look at the score sheet and evaluate your scores also always try to get a video of your ride. Sometimes you get the answer to your questions when you watch your video…
I think there are a lot of horses that don’t score in the 70’s but are consistently in the 60’s as they move up the levels. In addition, 80’s aren’t awarded frequently so I don’t think that is the absolute sign that one is ready to move up. If you do get 80’s then yes, I think it is definitely time to move up, but it shouldn’t be the only criteria for moving up.
[QUOTE=Xanthoria;8872546]
Agree with this.
I also tend to think:
40s and below: You or the judge are having a really bad day, or you need to move down a level
50s: You’re at the right level but you’re not quite there
60s: Respectable - keep working
70s: Great! Ready to move up if consistent.
80s and above: Time to move up.
Variables are the higher the level the lower the scores sometimes, and schooling shows sometimes being more generous.
For the most part, the percentages of course reflect the scale of scores.
Scale:
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]0 – Not Executed
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]6 – Satisfactory
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 295”]1 – Very Bad
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]7 – Fairly good
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 295”]2 – Bad
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]8 – Good
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 295”]3 – Fairly Bad
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]9 – Very Good
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 295”]4 – Insufficient
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]10 - Excellent
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“width: 295”]5 - Sufficient
[/TD]
[TD=“width: 295”]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Of course anything that leads to a ribbon could be deemed “excellent”! ;)[/QUOTE]
I’ve had this happen, and it bothers me, but usually I just shrug it off.
My theory (which may or may not be right) is that judges fall into the “starts at 5” or “starts at 6” category. That number is where the judges start with their score and you can move up or down from there based on how well, or how badly you ride. This means that you could have a pretty large discrepancy from show to show if the judge starts on a 6 and you get a 65%, then you go to a judge who starts on a 5 where the same ride might only be a 59%.
I’ve scribed a bunch as well as heard some of the judging forum lectures that indicate this is a pretty standard practice mentally for judges. And for the record, I don’t think starting on a 5 is wrong, it just makes it tougher to get that higher score.
Feel free to disagree with my theory! But I think it may account for some judges who are consistently lower than others.
I’ve heard judges say similar things but where they start with the gait score and go up or down. That is, a horse who is a 6 mover starts at a 6, a horse who is a 7 starts each movement with a 7, and so forth.
[QUOTE=eponacelt;8872874]
I’ve had this happen, and it bothers me, but usually I just shrug it off.
My theory (which may or may not be right) is that judges fall into the “starts at 5” or “starts at 6” category. That number is where the judges start with their score and you can move up or down from there based on how well, or how badly you ride. This means that you could have a pretty large discrepancy from show to show if the judge starts on a 6 and you get a 65%, then you go to a judge who starts on a 5 where the same ride might only be a 59%.
I’ve scribed a bunch as well as heard some of the judging forum lectures that indicate this is a pretty standard practice mentally for judges. And for the record, I don’t think starting on a 5 is wrong, it just makes it tougher to get that higher score.
Feel free to disagree with my theory! But I think it may account for some judges who are consistently lower than others.[/QUOTE]
You can look at dessage detective and get an idea of how that judge scores your level in general. Might be helpful to know if that 59 is average, above, or below from that judge:
[QUOTE=Magicboy;8872518]
So, many of us compete against ourselves (I.e. Improving previous scores) but I’m curious about whether others interpret scores in relation to the others in the class. For example, I won a third level class in a small but rated show with a score of 59.7 There were seven in the class with scores from 54 to 58. My trainer says I did just fine but I’m not sure I like this way of thinking
What do you think? Tough judging or maybe the entire class was having a bad day?[/QUOTE]
Sounds as though you had a tough scoring judge. Psychologically it would be nice if they could have found another .3 to give you a 60.
I event and do schooling dressage shows/CTs so perhaps even more so my scores vary all over the place. I always like to look and see how my scores compare to others in my division. At horse trials I also look to see how other divisions under the same judge scored. For me I find this very informative, since the scoring can be so different between judges.
There is one schooling show which is awesome because you pick your ride time online, go do your test, get your scoresheet and go home. No classes, no ribbons. Oriented towards eventers. The only thing I don’t like about it is I don’t have any idea how I did compared to other riders. So if you are not familiar with the judge it can be hard to assess how you did.
But you tend to see the same group of judges, so you know the tough vs. generous ones.
I was just at a clinic wth Volkerr broman and heard him speak to this issue. He did say to take your score in the context of the other scores n the class, especially the distance between your score and the score of first place. In other words, if the first place got a 70 and you had mid sixties, or if the first place was 59 and your score was close behind that…
Makes sense to me.
Also said the collective remarks were the main st important info.
I don’t assume tough judging. Depends on the region you live in. Some places still have horrible ideas of what good dressage really is. They’ve never seen it and even though they have good coaches clinic in their area, the local instructors either don’t ride, don’t attend, or don’t learn well enough to retain the information and go back on old habits.
I find it helpful to watch a video of the ride, with the score sheet in hand and try to correlate the score and comments to the actual ride. I’ve been told that if the movement if “recognizable” it should be scored a 6. I’ve also seen, and experienced first hand, how problems can really bring a score down quickly.
That and watching the “On the Levels” videos, well at least the old ones where scores were given, is helpful in calibrating expectations.
[QUOTE=Velvet;8874687]
I don’t assume tough judging. Depends on the region you live in. Some places still have horrible ideas of what good dressage really is. They’ve never seen it and even though they have good coaches clinic in their area, the local instructors either don’t ride, don’t attend, or don’t learn well enough to retain the information and go back on old habits.[/QUOTE]
Agreed, and will also add some trainers have a tendency to blow smoke and go full on spin mode after a poor showing. Anything to deflect any question of blame that they haven’t trained horse/rider adequately. Facebook makes it comical. Day one of the show it’s looky looky we won a class…Day Two…not in the ribbons…crickets…and a cheesy motivational post about “it’s not about winning”. I get it, it’s tough being the trainer and coach…there is a fine line between keeping someone’s spirits up after a bad class and giving an honest/unbiased assessment of the pair in relationship to the competition.
[QUOTE=Velvet;8874687]
I don’t assume tough judging. Depends on the region you live in. Some places still have horrible ideas of what good dressage really is. They’ve never seen it and even though they have good coaches clinic in their area, the local instructors either don’t ride, don’t attend, or don’t learn well enough to retain the information and go back on old habits.[/QUOTE]
I can’t quite understand how you come to this perspective when you 1) never seem to reveal where you live, and 2) when your many posts indicate that you loathe dressage shows, USDF, GMOs, modern competition, modern judging, and that you neither compete in them or even attend them to spectate.
In any case, no.
Believing that judges in some regions know what’s good and that in others they don’t is not a correct assessment of what is responsible for the overall low scoring that the OP describes. It may be responsible for TRAINING differences in various parts of the Country but geography has no real effect on show scores from show to show.
That’s because the judges travel in to judge at the various GMOs and regions, from other places. Judge lives in Massachusetts, he judges a show in California. Judge lives in Denver, she judges a show in Washington. Some judges’ 5s are other judges’ 6s, and if the show is bigger or more prestigious they sometimes take an even more critical eye.
That is how putting on a rated show works. The ideas about what is good/poor/satisfactory/whatever at a show don’t vary because of geography. They vary because of the judges’ subjective differences, wherever they come from.
Any competitor who shows in several recognized shows per season and in more than one place learns this very quickly. The same movement done the same way can score dramatically differently from judge to judge. And sometimes it’s done even BETTER than at the last outing, yet, it scores lower. It seems harsh at times but that’s just part of dressage competition. The assignment of the number to the specific movement has a lot of variables.
That’s why, IMO, the comments are what should be scrutinized more closely than the numbers, in order to assess and to improve.
[QUOTE=Magicboy;8874656]
I was just at a clinic wth Volkerr broman and heard him speak to this issue. He did say to take your score in the context of the other scores n the class, especially the distance between your score and the score of first place. In other words, if the first place got a 70 and you had mid sixties, or if the first place was 59 and your score was close behind that…
Makes sense to me.
Also said the collective remarks were the main st important info.[/QUOTE]
Makes sense, in this way you can understand the context of the judge’s scoring. Some judges are more high scoring and others low. One thing I look at is their judging history. A judge that judges many shows, at the more prestigious shows has more experience than one who judges few shows.
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