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

[MysticOakRanch]

@atlatl

Of course you’d get a better score on a better mover. The same is true in a Western Pleasure class.

I’ve gotten similar comments to yours on 3 different warmbloods I’ve shown. I’ve also been beaten by horses with “lesser” gaits when they rode better tests overall or my horse decided to leap about like a maniac or my newest horse who is tricky in the contact went around an entire test both BTV and behind the contact yet got an 8 on gaits! The message was clear that I needed to work on my training to show those horses to their potential.

We are in agreement that the judges are using a standard based on ideal warmblood movement. At least they aren’t making it up as they go.

Will you be at the annual meeting?

WP is not Dressage. I’ve been around long enough to remember when gaits were not such an overwhelming part of each movements score. So now a person can really buy the score if they have the money to do so. Which gets back to the point that qualifying score requirements don’t help the welfare of the horse, they don’t guarantee higher quality training, but they do hurt those who can’t afford to buy “the gaits”.

No, I won’t be at the annual meeting. Nor will anyone from my chapter. I had a schedule conflict and no one else was interested after the huge controversy last year.

[ladyj79]

To clarify, Carl and Charlotte do use ldr. Carl demonstrates in clinics and talks about not being “classical”, whatever classical really means.

[AltersAreUs]

@atlatl

I challenge anyone to produce a test with that comment. Judges really want each and every rider to succeed. Yes, some are pretty direct in their comments. My experience is that most are are extremely generous.

How about a test with this comment - " Technical difficulty higher than pair is proficient". Only comment on the whole damn thing and my regional freestyle championship, no less. Straight 6s across the board from the judge at C, no comments except that one at the end.

So I guess I’m one of the problem riders who are ruining it for the rest of you. :lol:

Judge at E gave lots of nice comments and a variety of scores ranging from 5.5s to an 8 for our halt (stop was always that mare’s best gait). This on a FS that I got high 70s on elsewhere and averaged high 60s to low 70s with. Between the two judges, I still got a 63.something, which tells you how far apart the two judges were, score wise.

One of the horses that beat me was a FANCY moving young horse that reared three times in the ring. Judge at E actually stood up and tried to signal the judge at C but apparently she was blinded by the flinging hooves.

So on second thought, no, I don’t think my little flat moving arab and I are the problem in dressage - I’m pretty sure that judges like the one I had at that show are. And I refuse to ever show in front of her again and I let the local shows that bring her in know why I’m not there, even when I can normally be depended on to come (and haul in others from my barn).

[Belowthesalt]

@crthunder

Maybe I’m misunderstanding your post but are saying valegro was a six mover? That was never true (he won a lot as a young horse) and there is a video of him af 5 with Carl talking about how naturally gifted he is. He was “cheap” for other reasons. I love him and how correct he was with the extra pizzazz gaits.

Yes, you are misunderstanding. ;0) I am not saying Valegro is a 6 mover. He is a lovely mover with that movement enhanced by correct, sympathetic training.

What I meant was that the success of Valegro seemed to indicate a trend toward rewarding correct, harmonious training and away from what Gerd Heuschmann calls the “show trot,” away from the tense but spectacularly moving horses, away from rollkur. Instead, this new, under the table move re qualifying scores for freestyles (and what would seem to be a “foot in the door” for MORE qualifications and restrictions) seems to be saying Valegro was a one-off, and that they still want to see/reward over the top movement, whether correctly trained or not, and please don’t hurt our eyes with your correctly trained but ordinary movers.

[atlatl]

@AltersAreUs

How about a test with this comment - " Technical difficulty higher than pair is proficient". Only comment on the whole damn thing and my regional freestyle championship, no less. Straight 6s across the board from the judge at C, no comments except that one at the end.

So I guess I’m one of the problem riders who are ruining it for the rest of you. :lol:

…

So on second thought, no, I don’t think my little flat moving arab and I are the problem in dressage - I’m pretty sure that judges like the one I had at that show are. And I refuse to ever show in front of her again and I let the local shows that bring her in know why I’m not there, even when I can normally be depended on to come (and haul in others from my barn).

I’d say that is a pretty direct comment diplomatically phrased, but is not what I challenged people to share. Also, no comments except at the end makes me think that’s a pretty lazy judge or the scribe was the weak link. Either way, voting with your wallet is the smart thing to do.

You’re not ruining anything for me; as I’ve said before I have no interest in riding a freestyle and frankly, I’m OK with people riding at whatever level they want. Also, I recognize that more entries means shows are more profitable and hence more likely to be held.

My only point in responding to this and the other threads is to correct information I believe to be incorrect and to provide a counterpoint to a lot of vitriol levied at judges in general.

I was in the booth with a local judge who is routinely cited as being overly harsh. The scribe was simply awful; illegible handwriting and missing many comments. The judge re-wrote many of the comments on many of the tests repeatedly saying that the riders had paid a lot of money to come and receive feedback from her and she was obligated to make sure they got their money’s worth. I suspect not all the riders appreciated her comments, but here was one lady doing her best to provide a service to those she viewed as her customers. Still I know people that won’t ride in front of her because they think she’s breed biased, doesn’t like them, is too mean, etc.

[Belowthesalt]

@atlatl

I challenge anyone to produce a test with that comment. Judges really want each and every rider to succeed. Yes, some are pretty direct in their comments. My experience is that most are are extremely generous.

Well, I don’t have it, be cause it wasn’t my test, but I saw it. Some years ago, my trainer received back a test with good comments but a low score. At the bottom was the comment, “Lovely ride. Too bad about the color.” The horse was a palomino. Now that was some years ago, but I imagine there are still a few judges, admittedly not many, that still think that way.

[atlatl]

@MysticOakRanch

WP is not Dressage. I’ve been around long enough to remember when gaits were not such an overwhelming part of each movements score. So now a person can really buy the score if they have the money to do so. Which gets back to the point that qualifying score requirements don’t help the welfare of the horse, they don’t guarantee higher quality training, but they do hurt those who can’t afford to buy “the gaits”.

No, I won’t be at the annual meeting. Nor will anyone from my chapter. I had a schedule conflict and no one else was interested after the huge controversy last year.

Poor example on my part regarding the WP statement, what I was trying to say is that better gaits make it easier for the horse to do what is required in a test so should result in a better score in general. I’ve only been doing dressage for about 20 years, started on my AQHA all around horse and struggled to get in the 60s at TL. This on a horse with points in 9 events so I suspect gaits had something to do with it even then.

I agree with your comments on the impact of qualifying scores. I do think the argument put forth by some is a tad schizophrenic in that they bemoan both the emphasis on gaits and the perceived overly generous scoring.

Sorry I won’t see you this weekend. I was hoping to chat in person.

[atlatl]

@Belowthesalt

Well, I don’t have it, be cause it wasn’t my test, but I saw it. Some years ago, my trainer received back a test with good comments but a low score. At the bottom was the comment, “Lovely ride. Too bad about the color.” The horse was a palomino. Now that was some years ago, but I imagine there are still a few judges, admittedly not many, that still think that way.

Nope, hearsay and the comment challenge is specifically for “horse not a warmblood” or some facsimile thereof.

I frequently imagine I’m 20 pounds lighter and 20 years younger, yet there’s that darn scale and mirror!

[Belowthesalt]

@atlatl

Nope, hearsay and the comment challenge is specifically for “horse not a warmblood” or some facsimile thereof.

I frequently imagine I’m 20 pounds lighter and 20 years younger, yet there’s that darn scale and mirror!

Well, at the time, a palomino WB was a rarity (the horse in question was a Appendix QH that was something like 31/32nds TB), so obviously the judge wanted to see some “other” kind of horse. I wonder what kind? How would you like the comment I got once - “Nice test, but Appaloosas are not “English” horses.” Huh?? To me that indicates a preference for some other type of horse, and I doubt they meant a Thoroughbred. (And in this instance, the horse in question was not a downhill Quarterloosa.)

[netg]

I think the bias, which judges are taught, is toward expensive warmblood-type gaits. I have had judges for whom I scribed bemoan not being able to give higher scores to non-warmbloods who were true to breed type and really lovely horses. They’ve complained that because those horses didn’t have the kind of spring they weren’t supposed to have per their breed, they couldn’t score over 6/7 most of the movements - but scored higher when possible. Those judges were the ones who rewarded and scored up at all opportunities for well ridden/trained horses, though. And who the fancy warmblood riders typically didn’t like because they scored down for incorrect, regardless of flash of movement.

It’s perfectly consistent to believe that horses should not be scored super high only on the basis of their gaits, and that often they are over scored, and to believe that horses should not be scored low only on the basis of their gaits, and can often be under scored. I want to see only correct rewarded. I’ve definitely been under scored with a judge writing “needs more cadence” all over my test when showing my mare at training level test one in her first rated show. She is a warmblood, and she looks the part - but her trot has been slow to develop, because she is not dressage specific breeding, and I knew her whole family were late bloomers when I bought her. Same horse was OVERscored in a really awful test where she was so amped up, she had artificially larger gaits than usual - and tons of tension and many mistakes in the test. To this day, I feel far better about the ride we placed last in which looks terrible on her record than I do about the class we won which shouldn’t have scored over about 55.

I’d like to see correct scoring in both directions - reward the training level test with free forward movement, little flash but a horse almost entirely on the bit (when only bit acceptance is required), and smooth transitions, accurate geometry, and the various indications that work is going as it should to move on. And when the horse is in there totally tight but with active hind leg and knee action, and too squirrely to go in a straight line or get transitions which are actually through, geometry issues, and general tension - score it down for those signs.

[SnicklefritzG]

6’s across the board and only one comment at the end is a lazy judge. I’ve scribed many times and don’t find it difficult to write what the judge tells me to write. I doubt that test was about the scribe.

@atlatl

I’d say that is a pretty direct comment diplomatically phrased, but is not what I challenged people to share. Also, no comments except at the end makes me think that’s a pretty lazy judge or the scribe was the weak link. Either way, voting with your wallet is the smart thing to do.

You’re not ruining anything for me; as I’ve said before I have no interest in riding a freestyle and frankly, I’m OK with people riding at whatever level they want. Also, I recognize that more entries means shows are more profitable and hence more likely to be held.

My only point in responding to this and the other threads is to correct information I believe to be incorrect and to provide a counterpoint to a lot of vitriol levied at judges in general.

I was in the booth with a local judge who is routinely cited as being overly harsh. The scribe was simply awful; illegible handwriting and missing many comments. The judge re-wrote many of the comments on many of the tests repeatedly saying that the riders had paid a lot of money to come and receive feedback from her and she was obligated to make sure they got their money’s worth. I suspect not all the riders appreciated her comments, but here was one lady doing her best to provide a service to those she viewed as her customers. Still I know people that won’t ride in front of her because they think she’s breed biased, doesn’t like them, is too mean, etc.

[Reddfox]

I’ve been thinking a lot about this topic. I’m against the rule change, I believe that the freestyles were a way for people to experience dressage in another way - spectator and rider alike. Grassroots seems to be the new buzzword at the conventions. All the talks are how to stop the loss of members migrating out of the larger organizations, yet I have yet to hear a solid idea from those in charge of stopping this flood. Instead, the organizations (USEF, USDF and others) continue to prop up the 1% of riders that could make teams, all the while shrinking the funnel of potential future star riders. Even this new grassroots committee is missing the mark since there are no actual grassroots-type riders on it, and I don’t see dressage representation.

So, two thoughts:

1. Score inflation. Where I’m at, we don’t see huge score inflation, in fact, scores tend to be quite low except for a few “major” players that have fancier horses- but, even those riders don’t break 70 often. Based on my experiences, I believe that the scores are inflated at the top end of the sport, but not necessarily the bottom. However - the low scores seems to be an indication of judges wishing and hoping that they were judging fancier horses, and holding us to an ideal that we can’t reach.

2. Gaits: I do place blame squarely on the shoulders of the judges who can’t see past flinging feet. In fact, the FEI just put out a sponsored post that mentions “flicky toes” in reference to dressage horses. Until this mentality changes, we will continue to see unharmonious and incorrect rides scoring above average horses that may not be impressive, but are performing to their peak and show elasticity and other hallmarks of a nicely moving, well trained horse.

A little story… I show, and I have access to nice horses - not top of the line, but horses that I have to eke out scores based on accuracy and ringcraft. However, someone that I know has a very nice black warmblood - the type that gets points for just walking into the ring. The way that this horse goes is as incorrect as I’ve seen, with gaping mouth and tense, wringing tail, botched movements and disobedience in every test, with the rider hauling on that double bridle for all she’s worth. I watched the coach (a very classical-type person) covering up blood in the sand from its mouth during schooling for weeks straight - yet they got their gold after a few outings - why? The horse out of the box is a NICE horse. Freestyles are a bit of an equalizer in my mind because of choreo and music - it gives average horses a chance to compete.

Also, raising the scores would not have changed the De Mar fiasco. If USDF/USEF was embarrassed by that, they should have been, and so should the judges that gave them scores at the upper levels. They should have been rung out every time the riding devolved into what it did. THAT is looking out for the welfare of the horse, not raising the qual scores for freestyles and rewarding “flicky toes”.

So what do we do? Continue to roll over and let a few elitist judges continue to change our sport? Myself and many others want to see changes. Let’s get it done. Our grassroots is the majority - our dollars talk, and we have the ability to flood the organizations with letters and emails to let our voices be heard. I hope that we continue to fight this. It makes zero sense for the state of dressage in the long run.

[pluvinel]

@Reddfox

…

So what do we do? Continue to roll over and let a few elitist judges continue to change our sport? Myself and many others want to see changes. Let’s get it done. Our grassroots is the majority - our dollars talk, and we have the ability to flood the organizations with letters and emails to let our voices be heard. I hope that we continue to fight this. It makes zero sense for the state of dressage in the long run.

I agree that the grass roots has to get its voice heard. Ten years ago, when the qualifying to ride rule was proposed, the COTH forum played a pivotal role in getting that voice together. That is the power of the “Fourth Estate.”

It is now 10 years on…and time to go at it again. And this time, perhaps boycotting membership fees might also send a clear message.

[GramV]

@Reddfox

I

So what do we do? Continue to roll over and let a few elitist judges continue to change our sport? Myself and many others want to see changes. Let’s get it done. Our grassroots is the majority - our dollars talk, and we have the ability to flood the organizations with letters and emails to let our voices be heard. I hope that we continue to fight this. It makes zero sense for the state of dressage in the long run.

Yes! Connie Davenport wrote in the CDS newsletter that they were all flooded with communication about this, and everyone was against it. I firmly believe that was the turning point.

I think we need to continue to flood the dressage committee with the facts about why this is wrong–it’s against their own rules for a rule change, there is no basis for their stated reasoning, there is no basis for their implied reasoning, and it is speeding up the flood of people away from showing.

I think separately, letters of personal stories and how this is affecting individuals is of great value.

[Reddfox]

What’s also ridiculous is that most of the training/riding that people would consider to be abusive is happening at the upper levels and in the elite levels of the sport. The most our horses have to deal with is poor sitting trots, not rollkur, weighted pastern doohickies, poling, caning, whipping, whatever it takes to get the marionette legs that the judges seem to just love.

[GramV]

@Reddfox

What’s also ridiculous is that most of the training/riding that people would consider to be abusive is happening at the upper levels and in the elite levels of the sport. The most our horses have to deal with is poor sitting trots, not rollkur, weighted pastern doohickies, poling, caning, whipping, whatever it takes to get the marionette legs that the judges seem to just love.

I agree. And the measures they have taken to “fix” it seem to have made it worse.

In trying to stop rolkur, judges have gone overboard in punishing any horse in the scores who drops their head at all or isn’t completely in front of the vertical. What I am seeing is that this is now resulting in people never letting the horses heads down at all or releasing, and literally hanging on the bit all of the time, resulting in dropping backs, hocks out behind, and heads pulled back into the neck. Giraffes are winning.

And with the emphasis on the piaffe and passage in the GP and the new super movers who are basically carriage horses not doing them correctly, it is forcing anyone with correct horses who want to win to resort to all of the things you mentioned above.

We’re all seeing it. from our local levels to the top levels. I don’t think the fix of this was meant in any way bad, but it has caused a huge problem, and is certainly not creating happy horses. Someone mentioned even Charlotte Dujardin is never mentioning getting horses correct and through the back, but just up and and forward with very young horses. This is not correct dressage.

[GramV]

I’m bumping this thread because, from what I know, it doesn’t look like anyone will do anything. A rep. from the USDF meeting noted the best that might be done is they will do things by the book in the future.

Has anyone written the committee members and heard back? I have not.

I am really not OK with my money going to these organizations, them doing this sort of thing, and then refusing to respond.

Perhaps we should all contact Lisa Goretta again. She is president of the USDF and on the USEF sporthorse committee, so she is on the middle of all of this. She responded to a few people saying she understood, as she was an AA, too. She never responded to me.

[BlackPearlz]

I didn’t get a response from anyone either.

[GramV]

@BlackPearlz

I didn’t get a response from anyone either.

They appear to be in the ignore stage, and not interested in actually righting a wrong. I responded to a post Lisa had at a convention asking about this, but she would not reply.

I spoke to me USDF delegate who went to the convention for the first time this year (she was just elected) and she was still trying to understand the whole process, but what it seemed to come down to is they really are in a rarified air and are not listening to the majority, nor seeking out the feedback, to make sure this kind of thing does not happen and takes everything into consideration.

[pluvinel]

I think the voices are making their way up the hierarchy via the GMO’s…at least my GMO has said it voiced its opinion to USEF (eg. another name for the USDF leadership) to follow the decision reached at the convention.

But I still think the PM’s should withhold PM dues to USDF as a statement.

If enough GM members complain to their GMO, why couldn’t the GM dues be held back?