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

[right_horse_at_the_right_time]

@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.

This is EXACTLY what I proposed on Facebook.

a handicap for gaits, etc.

[right_horse_at_the_right_time]

@Belowthesalt

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).

I love it :).

[right_horse_at_the_right_time]

@Belowthesalt

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!

Immediately, at once!!!

[SnicklefritzG]

It’s the fox guarding the henhouse. The USDF is finding a way to put the burden on the members to make “improvements” rather than looking in the mirror and evaluating judging standards.

[TequilaMockingbird]

They’re shooting themselves in the foot. The more I read, especially that ridiculous response from Lisa Goretta, the more I don’t want to give USDF a single red cent of my hard earned money. I’d rather spend it on schooling shows, clinics and more lessons.

And when there’s nothing left but the holier than thou riders all riding at 63% or above on their 8/9 movers, they can all pat themselves on the back while paying sky high fees and driving hours to get to the few USDF shows that will still be around.

[GramV]

I think in my response, I am going to include a link to these threads, and I think other people should.

Not one single person here thinks it’s a good idea, and the group letter Cynthia Collins sent includes well over 100 signatures. It is 100% a lie anyone asked for this.

I just entered a show. Qualifying fees for USDF championships went up from $10 to $15. It cost me $145 to enter one FEI class on one horse, and $207 to enter two FEI classes on another. That’s just entry fees.

[atlatl]

@GramV

… Qualifying fees for USDF championships went up from $10 to $15. …

It’s been $15 for as long as I can remember, just went through my checkbook and verified it was $15 last year.

[kris0227]

@atlatl

It’s been $15 for as long as I can remember, just went through my checkbook and verified it was $15 last year.

I went to regionals in 2017, it was only $10 that year, it went up for last year (2018).

[yaya]

To go with needing a 63% to ride a freestyle, you now need 65% (twice) at any level freestyle to qualify for Regionals.

They also bumped up Open PSG, I1, and I2 to 62%. (GP, and all AA and J/YR scores for the FEI levels stayed the same.)

[GramV]

@atlatl

It’s been $15 for as long as I can remember, just went through my checkbook and verified it was $15 last year.

Yeah. It’s been $10 for as long as I can remember. Since I wasn’t trying to qualify for championships last year, I didn’t see that.

The USEF is meeting right now. I think an email a day to them with your personal story might help. If you need the emails, PM me and I will send them to you. They make it very difficult to get the them on the USEF site.

[Cowgirl]

@hoopoe

and that people are saying the 60% for HOY / all breeds / regional championships are TOO LOW!

man

In the discussions I have seen on FB, by those in support of the 63, they also discussed that medal scores need to be raised to 65 and that HOY/Award scores need to be raised as well. This is coming.

[pluvinel]

The USEF Convention is starting today.

Perhaps time to contact our illustrious representatives and remind the Dressage Committee that the USDF BOG recommended rescinding the rule.

[skydy]

Has anyone had an opportunity to ask the PTB why they are taking this route, instead of discussing scoring criteria with the judges?

[GramV]

@Cowgirl

In the discussions I have seen on FB, by those in support of the 63, they also discussed that medal scores need to be raised to 65 and that HOY/Award scores need to be raised as well. This is coming.

Can you share any of those you see here so we can see what’s being said by whom and chime in?

[Cowgirl]

@GramV

Can you share any of those you see here so we can see what’s being said by whom and chime in?

No I can’t. But go look at the Facebook pages of the judges on those committees…

[SnicklefritzG]

Who are the people who are in support of the 63% cutoff for freestyles and 65% for medals?

This is absolutely asinine.

The first thing that came to mind when I read the quote below are the number of horses that make it to GP but not necessarily with 65% scores. Statistically speaking, what percentage of horses that are put into a dressage program ever make it to that level, if only to be just barely “sufficient”?

Raising medal cutoffs and similar programs to 65% would have a terrible impact on many wonderful horse and rider pairs.

There is one very stellar example in my area of exactly the type of negative impact this would have. One particular individual I know very well has brought many horses through the FEI levels. One of their horses is an off-breed, is small, but has risen to GP, something many purpose-bred warmbloods don’t do. This horse’s scores averaged between roughly 60% and 64% as it moved up the levels. There were some scores higher than 65%, but for the most part it’s not a 65+% horse. These proposed score cutoffs might mean a horse or horse/rider team such as this one might not achieve recognition for their efforts in the form of medals and other awards.

Anyone who knows this horse is super excited that it made it to GP. This horse has many other amazing talents, but I don’t want to list all of them or it might be obvious who I’m talking about. If this horse wasn’t a super high scoring horse at the lower levels, but was able to make it to GP, that says something about it the quality of the horse and its training. Why should this pair not be recognized for their achievement?

I agree that if the 63% cutoff for freestyles isn’t recinded AND if medal requirements are raised to 65%, a lot of people will choose to drop out of USDF and quit showing.

@Cowgirl

In the discussions I have seen on FB, by those in support of the 63, they also discussed that medal scores need to be raised to 65 and that HOY/Award scores need to be raised as well. This is coming.

[alibi_18]

@Cowgirl

In the discussions I have seen on FB, by those in support of the 63, they also discussed that medal scores need to be raised to 65 and that HOY/Award scores need to be raised as well. This is coming.

Our Canadian award system is different.

At training and 1st, you (and your horse) get a bronze medal for each lecel if you get 4 scores over 65%. (4 diff. judges.)

At 2d, 3rd and 4th, you get a silver medal if you get 4 scores over 62%.

At PSG to GP, you need 4 scores over 62% as well, but to get gold medals. From 4 diff. judges. If there is panel, only the end result counts as 1 score.

Our freestyle requirement is, IMMHO unfortunately, 1 score of 55% at the level… but I know it’s being discussed te be raised at least at 60%.

Seriously, one score at 63% should not be out of reach if you are at the right level.
Maybe they will let it at 60% from PSG and up. Who knows.

[Cowgirl]

It was discussed on Dolly Hannon’s page back when we first learned about the rule change (October). Several people had supported the change and then said that higher scores were needed, up to 65 and commented that 65 should e the medal score requirement. One person I remember in particular making this comment (about medal scores) wes judge Natalie Lamping. I believe she was responding to the letter that Cynthia Collins authored (and was signed by over 100 people) stating that it was unfair to have a qualifying score when you don’t need one to ride any of the levels, and that it was unfair to make that score a 63 when 60 is the score needed for medals. NL sad that in fact the medal scores SHOULD be raised.

Ultimately, this is what they really want.

[GramV]

@Cowgirl

It was discussed on Dolly Hannon’s page back when we first learned about the rule change (October). Several people had supported the change and then said that higher scores were needed, up to 65 and commented that 65 should e the medal score requirement. One person I remember in particular making this comment (about medal scores) wes judge Natalie Lamping. I believe she was responding to the letter that Cynthia Collins authored (and was signed by over 100 people) stating that it was unfair to have a qualifying score when you don’t need one to ride any of the levels, and that it was unfair to make that score a 63 when 60 is the score needed for medals. NL sad that in fact the medal scores SHOULD be raised.

Ultimately, this is what they really want.

I went through everyone on the USEF committee’s FB pages and couldn’t find anything. Dolly Hannon shared Cynthia Collins’ letter, and there were responses to her notice they were upping the requirement. A lot of people were unhappy. Natalie Lamping wasn’t on there. Someone named Noah Ratner were all for it, as were Janet Foy and Anne Howard. Everyone else was against it.

Again, I urge everyone to share your personal stories and why you will probably stop showing, or whatever you want with all of the committee members. I haven’t gotten a single reply to two emails yet, despite asking for a response.

[Cowgirl]

@GramV

I went through everyone on the USEF committee’s FB pages and couldn’t find anything. Dolly Hannon shared Cynthia Collins’ letter, and there were responses to her notice they were upping the requirement. A lot of people were unhappy. Natalie Lamping wasn’t on there. Someone named Noah Ratner were all for it, as were Janet Foy and Anne Howard. Everyone else was against it.

Again, I urge everyone to share your personal stories and why you will probably stop showing, or whatever you want with all of the committee members. I haven’t gotten a single reply to two emails yet, despite asking for a response.

Natalie deleted her comments.