@atlatl - When I audited in 2019/2020 only the L candidates could ask questions. It may be different now.
I did the L Program in 2019-2020 and my experiences were very different from yours so I believe things have evolved and changed since you participated in that way.
1 Like
That is why I said that things have changed. I did this a while ago…can’t remember dates, so you are talking maybe +20 yrs ago? Time flies.
I’ve been here long enough to remember your original diatribe on this topic and your experience. Not really interested in rehashing it.
3 Likes
I suspect it depends on the organizer. I would have been more clear had I said there is nothing inherent in the L program itself that prevents auditors from asking questions.
Lots of good stuff about the judge education program snipped.
I’m not getting your point about training.
IME scribing different judges have different pet peeves. Also IME, scores don’t vary as wildly as they used to say 10 years ago.
For the L program this Fall in Region 8, it states that auditors may not ask questions orally. They may, however, write questions on cards which the instructor may choose to address.
1 Like
Diatribe? It was a statistical analysis of 45,000 dressage scores. There were 4 COTHers who participated. Several had PhD’s. The study was published in a peer-reviewed journal of the American Statistical Association.
The work was undertaken when USDF/USEF was proposing a qualifying rule to advance levels. The proposed rule was withdrawn…in part due to this analysis. You can thank us for the work.
4 Likes
Here seems to be the FEI response to the blue tongue and open mouth issues.
From the FEI website:
“To be considered in connection with the FEI Dressage Rules and
the FEI Dressage Handbook Guidelines for Judging”
Effective from 1 January 2024:
“The most important task for the Judge is to keep the Welfare of the Horse in mind. Therefore,
he/she must pay special attention to all signs of discomfort and penalize them significantly -
be it by deductions from the originally intended mark for minor mistakes or in case of serious
mistakes by a ‘Firewall’, i.e. by a mark that shall not exceed five (5).”
The Scale of Training is of great importance for the presentation of a Dressage Horse. General
training deficiencies must never be overlooked. Severe, basic faults in rhythm, suppleness,
contact, or lack of impulsion, straightness and collection must be clearly marked down. All low
marks must be explained to the Athlete by appropriate remarks, however, it is always helpful
for the communication between Judge and Athlete if the Judge comments also on higher marks.
Apart from irregularities in rhythm or severe suppleness issues, such as a tight or hollow back, a severely agitated tail or arrhythmic, compressed breathing in certain movements, Judges must pay special attention to all contact problems. A neck that is pulled together, an unsteady contact or a very busy, clearly open mouth with the tongue drawn up must be seen as fundamental mistakes. If the tongue is clearly hanging out to the side the mark cannot be
higher than 5, whenever it occurs or is noticed by the Judge - maybe even lower when the tongue is in addition over the bit."
It’ll be interesting to see the first time this rule is enforced in the Grand Prix (if it is), and which judges will enforce it during the Olympics. I hope they have the intestinal fortitude to call out Kittel and Werth and any others whose horses we’ve seen go with open mouths if they do it again.
I hope the judges don’t have to penalize anyone, and horses will be ridden in a way that the open mouths and blue tongues aren’t happening. We’ll see.
ETA Sorry for the weird format, I can’t change it.
Actually, I did thank you for the work and read the paper. I do agree that dressage isn’t rocket science, but then I’m a retired rocket scientist / applied mathematician (not a statistician) so I’m a tad biased.
The “diatribe” to which I refer is the collection of your, shall we say, enthusiastic posts insisting the horse was BTV.
BTW, I supported the proposed rule change. I suspect it was withdrawn primarily because of concerns regarding loss of membership.
3 Likes
My “diatribe” as you call it is a simple statement of what I saw as an auditor at the L-judges seminar. Is that a problem?
The OP asks a question about “truth” in dressage judging. I answer there is no “truth.” To back that statement, I related how in an L-judges seminar I saw a video with a horse BTV and asked a simple question of how a judge would judge such a movement. The question was asked because the rules repeatedly state the horse be IFV. It was a simple question of how to apply the rules. The judge instructor could have simply rewound the video to show I was wrong and the horse was IFV. Instead, she ignored the question.
When I talked with the participants who were pursuing the L-judge credential, a number were afraid of asking questions for fear of being black-balled. Today, as we speak, I know a long-time judge who is debating turning in her judge’s card because of the politics in judging. This is someone who has been a judge 30+ yrs.
1 Like
This is an interesting article and Steven Clarke has some remarks regarding BTV:
2 Likes
Thank you!!! This is why I was asking the question in the L-judges seminar.
From the article
Kathrin Kienapfel, of the equine research group at the Swiss national stud, led the investigation, published in Applied Animal Behaviour Science. It considered head-neck positions (HNPs) and “conflict behaviour” in horses competing in the grand prix special at a five-star international competition in 2018 and 2019.
The team analysed the angles of the poll, nasal plane and shoulders, and any conflict behaviour, in the form of tail-swishing or “unusual oral behaviour”, in the warm-up and in the arena.
“Horses with noselines held further behind the vertical tended to receive higher scores,” the study’s conclusion states.
“The result implies that there might be concerns related to animal welfare and rule compliance. The observed HNPs used by world-class riders in this study appear to contradict the established rules, yet these deviations are not penalised by the judges during competitions.”
snip
“It’s obvious to me as a lover of classical dressage that the rules are not always adhered to,” Dr Kienapfel said.
It seems Stephen Clarke disagrees with Dr. Kienapfel
“The judge’s role is to assess how close the horse conforms to the ideal criteria of the ‘training scale’ and must be prepared to use the scale of marks from 0 to 10 depending on the performance of each and every movement. For the 10 to be awarded, all criteria must be fulfilled to their utmost.”
But, Mr Clarke said, it is the overall picture that must be evaluated.
“We do see horses with great impulsion and expression, fulfilling the majority of the ideals of the training scale, but maybe a fraction behind the vertical, or maybe a little low at the poll,” he said. “They can still be awarded fairly good scores, but the 10s will evade them.
1 Like
Is this data or updated data (or both) freely available and if so, how would one obtain it?
When judges go through their program, at the final exam, they are expected to be within (IIRC) 1.5 points of the examiner in each movement, and have the final “placing order” correct…. How is that not ensuring that they are judging to the same standard?
And regarding questions and the L program.
It can be intimidating to ask questions for L candidates when they are being trained by/evaluated by the most highly regarded judges in the country. If they are afraid to ask a question perhaps they need to be sure the question doesn’t highlight their ignorance or lack of study/homework……
Please remember that the L program does not turn out judges. Those who graduate the L program with distinction are qualified to enter the “r” program, after which if they succeed they are qualified to judge through 2nd level.
The last time I scribed for an L candidate at the testing NONE of the candidates got Distinction (of 10). The last time I scribed for an “S” candidate (highest National level), only TWO of the candidates passed (of 10). . Both examples within the last year.
1 Like
You are missing the point. The “test validation” is not a test of the candidate, it is a test of the program.
If that is the case, then if someone is that intimidated that they feel they can’t ask a question in a LEARNING environment, then perhaps they should not be a judge.
The person who was afraid to ask a question is not a shy wallflower. She is a person who asks insightful questions and was afraid to ask not because it would reflect on her “lack of knowledge.” She was afraid to ask questions because she thought the question would be perceived as challenging the instructor and there would be retribution in the evaluation of her performance.
I am quite aware of what the L-program is.
Within 1.5 points per movement feels like quite the difference?! I hope that’s not the criteria - on a test that’s given a 60% by the examiner, that would mean someone could give it a 45% and someone else could give it a 75%…… and both would be awarded judges cards 
2 Likes
There is so much more that goes into the evaluations.
1 Like
Amen!
If so, then please elaborate on what is “so much more.” But I think we are speaking past each other. I am not asking about or discussing evaluating the L-candidates.
The OP asked about “truth” in dressage judging. As I have stated many multiple times, I do not believe there is a “universal truth” to dressage judging. There are individual judge’s opinions. How well those opinions are aligned with the rules is open to discussion because the judging SYSTEM has never been subjected to rigorous evaluation.
If the L-Program is attempting to coordinate and align judging to a standard, then there are established protocols to determine if the program is achieving its stated goals.
The “evaluations” I am discussing is NOT an evaluation of the L-candidates, but an evaluation of the L-Program itself.
1 Like
