I’m sorry you seem to be missing the point entirely. Let me make it as simple as I can, eh?
And out comes the ugly American. Resorting to stereotypes when faced with a calm logical argument.
…
If they don’t like to judge “bad” freestyles, then they need to do a more instructive job judging
…
For someone who claims to know how to judge, you consistently post things that indicate otherwise. Anyone who’s even been through just the L program knows judges are not supposed to teach.
I posited that the USEF Dressage Sport Committee = USDF.
That it is therefore disingenuous for the USDF to point their collective finger at USEF and say to the greater USDF membership, “Hey sorry members, this rule change is out of our control and it is now all in the hands of the USEF.”
I pointed out that the USEF DSC includes the current and past USDF Presidents, that 30% are high level decision makers in USDF and the rest are active competitors and member of USDF…
One thing to consider in your math - very seldom does a movement get a 0. SOME part of the movement was done. For example, if you are looking at the one tempis, the canter itself is part of the movement. If you go through the L Program, you will hear this over and over. The essence of the movement is the one tempis, but if the horse does a single flying change, and is cantering, they are still going to score a 1 (it may be very bad, but they did a change and they were in the correct gait). 0 implies NOTHING happened in the movement at all. So I think you need to replace your 0s with 1s, 2s, and 3s, and get a more realistic view of the score. It is possible to do NOTHING of the movement in a freestyle, of course, but super rare. In a regular dressage test, if you do nothing of the movement, you are going to be off course - or eliminated due to horse resistance. So we seldom will see a 0.
I got a big fat zero once; I did half my canter tour in a 3rd level test on the wrong lead, so after a half pass on the wrong lead (btw, I think I should have gotten bonus points for the increased level of difficulty :D) I didn’t do a flying change so got a zero on that. Then to add to the fun, I went off course immediately after so one could say I got a -2!
My rider score went down and I got scolded in the comments. That’s horse show biz!
If you’re not going to bother to read everything, than it’s now wise to comment. You just indicated you didn’t read.
I clearly did not say judges should teach. I said judges should be instructive in their judging in the context that some judges felt people weren’t doing freestyles well. If they were instructive in judging, as in giving more accurate scores so that they don’t have to require higher scores for freestyles, there would be no issue.
And if you do not feel alibi is constantly rude and dismissive to many people, I don’t know what to say.
Yes. I well know this. If you remember the example I gave, the horse cantered the whole piaffe/passage like, so there was not even the correct gait, so it wasn’t done. That’s why I gave that example, and why Axel commented that it was going to be very expensive. This is why I explained all of it the first time.
I agree the no tempi changes, but cantering, could be a 1.
And clearly we’re being simplistic with the math. Alibi insisted on doing the false numbers and giving everything else a 6 and a few 7’s, and then everything else 7’s. Realistically, besides the very expensive 0 line, there would be 1’s. 2’s, 3’s, and then 5’s, 6’s, and 7’s.
But, again, the whole purpose of the examples and the simplistic explanation was to the point of this thread. If the judges are scoring the regular tests accurately and not inflating scores, there should be no need for a higher requirement for freestyles under the reasoning that they are not technically very good.
For reference. I at first vaguely referred to a test with many, many, many problems, not wanting to identify any rider. When someone questioned that I didn’t know what I was doing, this was what I wrote and I have not changed it.
So, if anyone wants to pick, pick, pick off the topic, how about starting a new thread on the test I saw that you didn’t that I was referring to only to make a point. I think a thread on how specific movements are judged would be instructive. Clearly there is some confusion and very different views.
For what it’s worth, I agree with you. In essence, they are the same group of people who seem to be elitist, at least from the point of view of the masses.
In a conversation with a friend yesterday about one of them, her responses clearly seem to show that.
I won’t go so far as to say they have any bad intentions in this, but that it ended up that way. As I pointed out before, most of the members seem to live in Wellington, in an area of massive wealth and privilege when it comes to dressage. Lisa’s response to someone that she is an amateur just like everyone else is well meaning, but shows a real disconnect.
I’m hoping all of this is getting through to them and everyone is continuing to email them and ask them what is going on. I’m a little unhappy that so many people have written them and there has been little to no personal response, even a vague, mass response. They are supposed to be working for us.
I’d love to know what ride you saw, as I suspect I can find the movement scores if it’s what I think it was.
I’ve been looking at movement scores from tests, and seeing a pattern that it seems as if international judges are typically within 1/2 point of each other at the 6+ scores, but as far as 2 apart regularly on the movements which are lousy. That’s not counting things which are either judgment calls or artifacts of electronic scoring - for example, one judge giving a 6.5 and three judges giving a 4, then the next movement the judge who gave the 6.5 scored 2 points lower than the rest. That type of thing may be in disagreement on where movements end/start, or because the score had already been entered electronically. I have never done electronic scoring so don’t know how easy scores are to change, or if the judge was taking it easy on the scribe if they’re easy to change.
And I agree on lack of responsiveness. This all happened behind closed doors and in violation with organization rules - and so communication about it should be transparent, and there should be a public statement so members can know where the committees stand. I know I tend to assume nefarious intent when things happen behind a veil of secrecy. Derogatory comments toward riders from a judge/member of those committees happening publicly makes it seem even more likely.
Actually you did. Per Dictionary.com the primary definition of instruct is to teach and that of instructive is serving to instruct. I can only respond to what you write.
And no, I do not think @alibi_18 has been anything but rational in her, I’m assuming, responses to your posts. Just because someone doesn’t agree with you does not make them rude or dismissive.
Clearly, we are on different wavelengths, but hey, it’s still a free country.
Again, for the record, I don’t care who rides at which level or who does freestyles because more entries mean shows have a better chance of profitability and therefore are more likely to continue to be held. I will continue to weigh in on what I see as incorrect information or general vitriol levied against judges because it’s a hard, thankless job and I believe many simply do it for the love of the sport.
If you don’t like USDF/USEF rules and standards, and you feel your requests for changes are not being considered or resolved as you would like, you are free to vote with your wallet and not join either organization.
I would never want to share a bad ride publicly and get someone piled on here. And it was just clearly one of those bad days, so I really do not want to do that to anyone! It was just an example!
I think starting a thread on the points you mentioned is a good idea. It’s good to think through the whys of the way things happen in scoring. I have not done electronic scoring, either. I did just read something about how they are also going to start electronic scribing.
As I said, hopefully this whole thing will make them more responsive. We need to keep the perspective that we are paying a lot of money for them to be there, and while they do the work, they are working for us. I tend to think people are just venting, hyperbolizing, or spouting off when I hear bad things, and in clearer conversation it is more nuanced than that. It does make it worse when it is all behind closed doors. The only comments I have seen publicly were definitely on the side of miscommunication and frustration, so I always try to clarify. When there is a refusal to continue the conversation and clarify, that becomes an issue.
I clarified for you that " I said judges should be instructive in their judging in the context that some judges felt people weren’t doing freestyles well. If they were instructive in judging, as in giving more accurate scores so that they don’t have to require higher scores for freestyles, there would be no issue." If you do not want to believe me, I don’t know what to say.
And I agree judging is hard and they are put in a very difficult spot. Charlotte Bredhal said it best when she said there is just too much pressure and it’s not fun. The point was not to castigate any rider or judge, but bring to light the same judges that are saying the standard is too low are the ones that are helping it be there, in the context of the the discussion of raising the requirements.
And your point about not being a member is happening. As seen in these threads, a lot of people have not renewed their membership. I wonder what it will show next year, and if they rescind this, it will change people’s minds. I do know of more than a few people who have left and are not coming back.
Judges are currently awarding higher scores than many movements warrant according to the language of the current rubric.
Agree/Disagree?
Judges do so because they want to keep being hired.
Agree/Disagree?
Rather than enforcing consistent judging standards or regular training programs for both judges AND COMPETING MEMBERS, USDF/USEF is raising qualifying scores to place the onus on the rider to “do better” and not the judges, while simultaneously NOT CHANGING THE RUBRIC (language) to align with new “acceptable” scores.
Agree/Disagree?
USDF/USEF have been disingenuous about their motivation.
Agree/Disagree?
If scores are being inflated, all raising qualifying scores does is call for MORE INFLATION while also not realigning scores with the language/guidelines/rubric
To me the point in the conversation is to figure out precisely where the differences of opinion lie, otherwise people will continue to talk past each other.
I agree that people are talking past each other. Therefore posting your questions a separate thread will focus and enhance the conversation.
You questions have captured the essence of the issues.
It might even be an eye opener to post your questions as a poll with the “free text” responses available for further commentary.
A poll will add to the richness of the “data” to see what are the issues that people agree/disagree/don’t know…Building a good poll question will provide good insights.
The point is about rescinding the rule. A few people seem to be focused on picking nits and not reading the context or focus and wandering off, as usual.
