Musical Freestyle Requirements upped--let's try to rescind them

[right_horse_at_the_right_time]

@GramV

Thank you. Yes, I think Lisa Gorreta is lying. There is no way most of the membership agrees with this. Perhaps, exQHDQ, you could write her back and ask for specific numbers about this and ask that she share them with everyone. I believe there are several hundred full names and regions at the bottom of the letter above sent as a group against this.

This whole thing is making me start to rethink my course in equestrian sport along with laugh hysterically at how utterly STUPID this whole thing is.

The whole thing is BS. It’s an arbitrary quasi-informed arbitrary attempt by wanna-be elitists to feel out membership to see about the sh!tstorm that is to come in raising scores to compete at all.

I bust my ass working all the time to give my beloved horse the lifestyle to which I think he should be accustomed. And some (refraining from writing what I really want to write) group of people wants to save the sport from the imperfect half-assed amateurs like me who actually care more about their relationship with their beloved horses than they do about buying or breeding or selecting genetically perfect embryos in order to get some leg action in order to score just that much higher. (And before anyone freaks out that I’m saying you shouldn’t buy or breed or select your embryo, I’m not saying that here so don’t even bring it up because it’s a red herring. But that doesn’t make me not able to play with my own horse in the sandbox.) Makes me sour to the entire experience and from someone who never missed a show and had a BLAST doing it, I’m seriously rethinking spending another dime. I’ll make my own $0.50 ribbons and pay for clinics instead. And I can wear my fabulous coat and braid for those and get beautiful photos for my wall and make my OWN ride times thank you very much.

It’s a Gd* SANDBOX. Not the freaking Olympic Games and they are not the Greek Gods peering down to save our abused horses from ourselves.

Yes, if you get a 60 on a 9 mover, you probably shouldn’t be riding that freestyle.

So over it.

[right_horse_at_the_right_time]

@ladyj79

She’s not just saying she thinks the scores are too low, but that allthepeople contacting her agree with her.

Riiiiiiight. Because people are known to preemptively write letters because of all of the people who are writing letters saying it shouldn’t be raised. Riiiiiiiiight.

[yaya]

@right horse at the right time

This whole thing is making me start to rethink my course in equestrian sport along with laugh hysterically at how utterly STUPID this whole thing is.

I feel the same way. I am quickly becoming less and less interested in showing at all.

This is my last year on my multi-year USDF membership, then I’ll either renew one year at a time, or just wait to see if I decide to enter a show to even renew at all. I am a lifetime member with my GMO, so I could just show with that and not bother with Regionals or awards.

I have already gone annual instead of multi-year with USEF. May do the wait-and-see thing there, too. If I ditch Regionals, I could just pay non-member fee if I only show once. (Gee, maybe I could get out of doing the Safe Sport thing, too! Oops, looked it up. Still have to do it and non-members have to pay $20)

[skydy]

@Sticky Situation

She saying that the “overwhelming majority” of people contacting her not only support the Freestyle qualification score increase, but think that qualifying scores need to be raised across the board for All The Things (championships, medals, etc.) because apparently 60% does not do an adequate job of keeping the riffraff out.

I’d personally be interested to see the data behind that claim.

I agree. When claiming a trend in private correspondence, whether for or against an issue that affects many people, the statistics or "proof " must be shown if the board member is to be “above board”.

“Everyone says” or “most people agree” doesn’t cut it when so many people will apparently be affected by a rule change.

The whole under-the-table manner that has been the hallmark of this rule change needs to stop. I am looking at this issue from the outside, it does not affect me, yet it so obviously stinks…

[right_horse_at_the_right_time]

@yaya

I feel the same way. I am quickly becoming less and less interested in showing at all.

This is my last year on my multi-year USDF membership, then I’ll either renew one year at a time, or just wait to see if I decide to enter a show to even renew at all. I am a lifetime member with my GMO, so I could just show with that and not bother with Regionals or awards.

I have already gone annual instead of multi-year with USEF. May do the wait-and-see thing there, too. If I ditch Regionals, I could just pay non-member fee if I only show once. (Gee, maybe I could get out of doing the Safe Sport thing, too!)

I did safe sport but I don’t think I renewed yet. Safe Sport wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be. I am a mandatory reporter anyway, so I’m all for the training…but not for the mandate. I won’t say much more about that, though.

I love to show, but I hate the BS. If I can see a reason for something, fine. (drug testing horses, etc., rules about abuse, etc.) But this is A B S U R D. And the fact that it’s even a discussion is ridiculous. Why should anyone care. Judges need to ring out abuse. Full stop.

Aside from the rare group including the excited new boyfriend wanting to impress, the interested husband wanting to support, the Grandma in town, the horse’s former owner, or the circle of friends coming to support, there are virtually NO spectators at our shows. Good grief we didn’t even have a full crowd at WEG. And nationals?? Please. No one there. So yeah, let’s make it less fun. Smart decisions. Eyeroll.

[yaya]

@right horse at the right time

I did safe sport but I don’t think I renewed yet. Safe Sport wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be. I am a mandatory reporter anyway, so I’m all for the training…but not for the mandate. I won’t say much more about that, though.

I love to show, but I hate the BS. If I can see a reason for something, fine. (drug testing horses, etc., rules about abuse, etc.) But this is A B S U R D. And the fact that it’s even a discussion is ridiculous. Why should anyone care. Judges need to ring out abuse. Full stop.

Aside from the rare group including the excited new boyfriend wanting to impress, the interested husband wanting to support, the Grandma in town, the horse’s former owner, or the circle of friends coming to support, there are virtually NO spectators at our shows. Good grief we didn’t even have a full crowd at WEG. And nationals?? Please. No one there. So yeah, let’s make it less fun. Smart decisions. Eyeroll.

Again, same here. I love to show, but hate all the hoops we’re having to jump through to do something that is supposed to be fun. Definitely agree that the judges need to do their jobs and score appropriately if they see bad riding or abuse.

I did the Safe Sport already, back in August. Was just hoping I might not have to do it again. That we are forced to do it in order to show just ticks me off.

[right_horse_at_the_right_time]

@yaya

Again, same here. I love to show, but hate all the hoops we’re having to jump through to do something that is supposed to be fun. Definitely agree that the judges need to do their jobs and score appropriately if they see bad riding or abuse.

I did the Safe Sport already, back in August. Was just hoping I might not have to do it again. That we are forced to do it in order to show just ticks me off.

Agree entirely. It’s not like I’m knocking on the door of my gold medal, so do I really need to join? Perhaps not. Hmmmmm.

[Sticky_Situation]

@right horse at the right time

Riiiiiiight. Because people are known to preemptively write letters because of all of the people who are writing letters saying it shouldn’t be raised. Riiiiiiiiight.

"To whom it may concern:

I am writing to thank you profusely for your guardianship of equine welfare via the raising of the freestyle qualifying score to 63%. Last year I was forced to witness not one, not two, but THREE disgustingly mediocre First Level freestyles by riders that had CLEARLY never achieved above a 62% and therefore did NOT have the capability of riding to music without being abusive. One of them was even riding an Appaloosa! I’m still in therapy for the PTSD it caused. I am SO appreciative that it will never happen again, and instead the show will be over earlier and I can get back home in time for the early bird special at Golden Corral. Signed, one of the overwhelming majority."

[Cowgirl]

@right horse at the right time

This whole thing is making me start to rethink my course in equestrian sport along with laugh hysterically at how utterly STUPID this whole thing is.

The whole thing is BS. It’s an arbitrary quasi-informed arbitrary attempt by wanna-be elitists to feel out membership to see about the sh!tstorm that is to come in raising scores to compete at all.

I bust my ass working all the time to give my beloved horse the lifestyle to which I think he should be accustomed. And some (refraining from writing what I really want to write) group of people wants to save the sport from the imperfect half-assed amateurs like me who actually care more about their relationship with their beloved horses than they do about buying or breeding or selecting genetically perfect embryos in order to get some leg action in order to score just that much higher. (And before anyone freaks out that I’m saying you shouldn’t buy or breed or select your embryo, I’m not saying that here so don’t even bring it up because it’s a red herring. But that doesn’t make me not able to play with my own horse in the sandbox.) Makes me sour to the entire experience and from someone who never missed a show and had a BLAST doing it, I’m seriously rethinking spending another dime. I’ll make my own $0.50 ribbons and pay for clinics instead. And I can wear my fabulous coat and braid for those and get beautiful photos for my wall and make my OWN ride times thank you very much.

It’s a Gd* SANDBOX. Not the freaking Olympic Games and they are not the Greek Gods peering down to save our abused horses from ourselves.

Yes, if you get a 60 on a 9 mover, you probably shouldn’t be riding that freestyle.

So over it.

Thank you. I have soured on showing because of all this and more. I have not soured on horses and am actually enjoying my horses even more and spending my show money on clinics (and getting so much more from this). But it is good for me to know that others feel the same way. I used to love showing and participating in USDF and attending those events, but have been so worn down by all these obstacles and elitism and, honestly, poor judging (no comments, when there should be, nothing helpful, or giving some grand assessment after a 7 minute performance instead of just judging what is before them and this focus on gaits). Their actions are not going to eliminate the atrocious San Diego ride–THAT will only get worse as the people who remain in the system spend more money on gaits (because our system is trended toward this) to try and get the lofty scores that the USDF thinks the hinterlands of the USA can produce. Dressage will become more centralized to Wellington and San Diego (and a few other pockets) while areas like mine continue to lose venues and members.

[right_horse_at_the_right_time]

:lol:

@Sticky Situation

"To whom it may concern:

I am writing to thank you profusely for your guardianship of equine welfare via the raising of the freestyle qualifying score to 63%. Last year I was forced to witness not one, not two, but THREE disgustingly mediocre First Level freestyles by riders that had CLEARLY never achieved above a 62% and therefore did NOT have the capability of riding to music without being abusive. One of them was even riding an Appaloosa! I’m still in therapy for the PTSD it caused. I am SO appreciative that it will never happen again, and instead the show will be over earlier and I can get back home in time for the early bird special at Golden Corral. Signed, one of the overwhelming majority."

Lol!!! This is awesome!!!

not an APPALOOSA!!!

I am…AGHASTED!!

[right_horse_at_the_right_time]

@Cowgirl

Thank you. I have soured on showing because of all this and more. I have not soured on horses and am actually enjoying my horses even more and spending my show money on clinics (and getting so much more from this). But it is good for me to know that others feel the same way. I used to love showing and participating in USDF and attending those events, but have been so worn down by all these obstacles and elitism and, honestly, poor judging (no comments, when there should be, nothing helpful, or giving some grand assessment after a 7 minute performance instead of just judging what is before them and this focus on gaits). Their actions are not going to eliminate the atrocious San Diego ride–THAT will only get worse as the people who remain in the system spend more money on gaits (because our system is trended toward this) to try and get the lofty scores that the USDF thinks the hinterlands of the USA can produce. Dressage will become more centralized to Wellington and San Diego (and a few other pockets) while areas like mine continue to lose venues and members.

Yes yes yes. And more yes. Exactly what you said. It is out of control.

I was a sure thing for four classes in two days, maybe even a second horse with classes. Not now.

Many of our local riders do not show locally anymore but go to the coastal venues.

It’s happening.

Meanwhile I will continue to ride to my little speaker I take with me sometimes and act like I’m riding the GP freestyle. ;).

[yaya]

@right horse at the right time

Agree entirely. It’s not like I’m knocking on the door of my gold medal, so do I really need to join? Perhaps not. Hmmmmm.

Well, I am. Have my Intermediaire scores, and have a horse that can do the GP, but even though I’m close, I just don’t know that I want it anymore. If they want the super flashy gaits, my horse doesn’t have that, but he is a tryer. I just feel like the judges will overlook him.

[Cowgirl]

@yaya

Well, I am. Have my Intermediaire scores, and have a horse that can do the GP, but even though I’m close, I just don’t know that I want it anymore. If they want the super flashy gaits, my horse doesn’t have that, but he is a tryer. I just feel like the judges will overlook him.

My horse and I did very well at all levels up to GP (and what I consider well for the first year of grand prix on my first self trained horse–all recognized scores hovering at 60% and a gold medal score of 62). Then we had an accident and had to take two years off. When I returned to showing, the costs had gone up by 50% (what cost me $500 in 2015 cost $750 in 2017) and the judges suddenly no longer liked me or my horse. I thought perhaps that it was just that we weren’t back on form yet, but then I went and watched a bunch of shows last year and tracked scores. I noticed a trend that the judges were being quite generous at the lower levels and quite harsh at FEI (especially GP). I saw GP rides (by both amateurs and professionals) that were quite pleasant that I thought would score around 65% score 57-59%. So I don’t know where the “63 is the new 60” comment is coming from with respect to FEI. If you look at a good sample of judge’s average scores on Dressage Detective, their training level scores ARE trending up and their FEI level scores ARE trending down. I find this extremely confusing and disheartening, not just for myself but for my fellow riders who had a nice GP ride and can’t break 60 with it. YMMV depending on the judges selected, but this is what I saw at our large show venue. So while I DID get my gold medal (my highest score was a 62.6), I have no desire to go pound that test in order to show my freestyle. It is not worth the $10k it would probably cost me… But again, YMMV.

When they make all of these obstacles, there is obviously no acknowledgement of how much work it is to show. Adding all that crap on top of having to: take time from work or family, pack, groom and clean up after your horse all weekend, etc. Add to that crappy to no prizes, no parties or other social event, and two other events going on at the venue at the same time, having to pay a vet to get a health certificate each time…Honestly, it’s lost the fun, IMO.

[sammy14]

I wonder if the judges are comparing to the top Euro competition we all see, and judging to that standard, rather than a more realistic standard that exists everywhere that ISN’T a CDI or CDW ? I agree with you re the high marking of low level tests and low marking at FEI.

[pluvinel]

@xQHDQ

She’s saying she supports the increase to 63%.

I wonder how she can say that considering that there was the motion to rescind the 63% rule that was passed at the USDF convention by a margin of 2 to 1…hmmmmm?

[Belowthesalt]

@right horse at the right time

:lol:

Lol!!! This is awesome!!!

not an APPALOOSA!!!

I am…AGHASTED!!

OMG, I’m so sorry. I will retire my Appaloosa(s) at once and buy a WB!!! (The &*(%$(@# I will!!) Besides, if a Foundation Appaloosa/Arabian cross ISN’T a WB, what is it? ROFLOLPIMP!

[Belowthesalt]

@right horse at the right time

Meanwhile I will continue to ride to my little speaker I take with me sometimes and act like I’m riding the GP freestyle. ;).

I almost always used ride with a boombox going, playing our local classical station. If Schubert’s March Militaire or Chopin’s Polonaise Militaire or any Strauss Waltz was playing, my Araloosa became a Lipizzaner as we tooled around the ring doing our (made up on the spot) freestyle. Miss those days (since we’re walk only, now).

[SnicklefritzG]

Did you send it in?

@Sticky Situation

"To whom it may concern:

I am writing to thank you profusely for your guardianship of equine welfare via the raising of the freestyle qualifying score to 63%. Last year I was forced to witness not one, not two, but THREE disgustingly mediocre First Level freestyles by riders that had CLEARLY never achieved above a 62% and therefore did NOT have the capability of riding to music without being abusive. One of them was even riding an Appaloosa! I’m still in therapy for the PTSD it caused. I am SO appreciative that it will never happen again, and instead the show will be over earlier and I can get back home in time for the early bird special at Golden Corral. Signed, one of the overwhelming majority."

[x-halt-salute]

@Sticky Situation, that’s brilliant!

I’ve not been tuned in to the freestyle qualification change controversy, since I don’t have plans to ride a freestyle. But I find it alarming that USDF leadership seems to think that qualifying scores for recognizing achievement need to be raised across the board.

The change is purportedly to “raise the bar for technical proficiency” and to safeguard equine welfare. Is the rider who gets a 62% on a so-called “6 mover” (or even a “5 mover”) really demonstrating a lack of technical proficiency? Is that rider demonstrably more likely to be disregarding equine welfare than a rider who scores a 64 on an “8 mover”? Because following the logic of this rule change, you would expect the answer to both of those to be “yes”. Alas, scores just don’t transparently correlate to technical proficiency or effective/humane riding at the moment.

If what’s at issue is truly the protection of horses and instituting a higher standard for riders’ technical proficiency, there are alternatives that might more directly target those things without penalizing “ordinary” horses. Why not require the test in which a qualifying 60%+ score is received to also have satisfactory collective marks for the rider’s correct/effective use of aids and submission (which includes horse/rider harmony), for example?

And if a 60% no longer indicates satisfactory tests (but 63% does), then why don’t we evaluate why the goalpost has shifted away from the defined scoring standards instead of putting a band-aid on the ostensible score inflation?

If there is an equine welfare problem or a rider proficiency problem in dressage, this doesn’t strike me as a particularly logical solution to it.

[pluvinel]

[QUOTE=x-halt-salute;n10310451]
@Sticky Situation, that’s brilliant!

…

And if a 60% no longer indicates satisfactory tests (but 63% does), then why don’t we evaluate why the goalpost has shifted away from the defined scoring standards instead of putting a band-aid on the ostensible score inflation?

…/QUOTE]

Bingo!!!

Then again it seems that “scoring to the rulebook” is a train that has left the station.