New National MERs

[subk]

This is what Jealoushe thinks of riders with dressage scores in the forties:

@Jealoushe

The thing is, our level of dressage is so low that there just isn’t any excuse I will buy that it can not be improved. Riders just don’t want to spend the time on it. They would rather be out showing every weekend then spending $150 for a 45 minute lesson with a dressage guru every month. It’s obvious a lot of eventers hate dressage, but it’s part of our sport.

Riders are lazy, they are cheap.

@Jealoushe

I also don’t think upgrading is a necessity. Everyone wants to be able to upgrade without putting in the work for the other disciplines.

Riders don’t have a work ethic.

@Jealoushe

While I agree you want an amazing jumper to make the leap to Prelim, why are people SO desperate to upgrade that they are willing to throw out all the other things you should be good at to just jump at that level?

Riders are desperate.

@Jealoushe

That’s when I question whether it’s about being an eventer and horseman at heart or just wanting those “green letters” or “blue letters” so you can feel accomplished or be able to brag about it to your friends.

Riders are not horsemen. And they are shallow.

@Jealoushe

So what you can’t upgrade? Work and train more. Go hunting or Showjumping to jump bigger jumps.

Riders should give up and do another sport.

I let this post lay here for days because I found it so offensive and I didn’t want to say anything out of hand. But now, News Flash: Getting mediocre dressage scores does not mean a rider is morally inferior or ethically challenged. Making assumptions as to someone character based on their dressage scores is really poorly done.

For the record not only have I had horses who would typically be in the bottom third after dressage, I’ve also had horses that could be counted on to be in the top third–on more than one occasion with sub 20 scores. I’m not any better of a person because I’ve scored a 19 or any worse of a person because I’ve had a 45.

[EventerAJ]

@subk

I’m not any better of a person because I’ve scored a 19 or any worse of a person because I’ve had a 45.

Gently taking the personal offense out of this…

You could also write this sentence as “I’m not any better of a XC rider because I’ve scored a 19, or any worse of a XC rider because I’ve had a 45.” And it could be true. And I think that is why some of us get our feathers ruffled, because a crap day in dressage doesn’t mean you are dangerous in other phases.

If we are going to make excellence in dressage a requirement, recognizing that it is “imperative” to safety… why haven’t TPTB created Compulsory Retirement for anyone who scores over 45 in dressage? If we’ve decided that 5 rails in SJ (exceeding MER) is unsafe to go XC, how much of a leap is it to say that >45 (exceeding MER) is unsafe to continue?

The inherent issue with the increased rules is that they can’t be perfect. We can all think of lovely low 20s dressage rides who were dangerous XC. We have all seen skin-of-the-teeth, scary “clear” rounds in SJ that would have us holding our breath at the thought of them on XC. Sometimes you just get lucky and/or the saint of a horse does the work and you get better than you deserve. There is no where in the rules to account for this.

FWIW, I would actually be in favor of a licensing type requirement to move up to Prelim and beyond; wherein a rider/horse combination would be evaluated by an appropriate level ICP (or whatever it is now) instructor and pass/fail. I realize it could open the USEA and the coaches up to possible liability (in case of failure), but it would be the best “speed bump” for safety instead of adding layers of MER requirements that will still let the dangerous ones through.

[ACMEeventing]

We have all had THOSE tests, and the random “tougher than usual” judge.

BUT, it does chafe me when people say there is no way a test could have possibly earned a certain score by watching a video. The only view that is being judged is directly behind C. Agreed, there could be moments that are missed by the judge or whatever. Even standing a legal distance behind the judge isn’t going to offer the same view. And let’s face it, judge’s are trained to evaluate each movement based on the directives. Many times when people are unhappy with a score they don’t really analyze which basic was missing from the directive.

However, a horse that is typically upper 30’s with a few tense moments is not going to hit 45.

Using the Training Test A, for example, you get straight 6’s all the way down and a 6 for harmony (which is the only doubled score) earns you a converted eventing score of 40.

Let’s say conditions or training or whatever aren’t great and you get 11x 6’s, 5x5’s, and a harmony of 5. That is still a 43.4.

Really having a rough moment a bag a couple of 4’s along with your 6’s and the judge snaps a harmony of 5 at you? It STILL comes in under 44.

So I stand by my statement that an average horse on an average day should still have no problem earning a sub 45.

This isn’t to say I am or am not a fan of the rule, but this “we had a few bad moments and now we’re screwed” concept is way off. FWIW, I think @EventerAJ had a super idea of allowing one of the MER’s to be above 45 to capture that perfect storm of a test when all the others are within range.

[FrittSkritt]

It’s too bad there’s no means of creating a “grade on a curve” when there’s that judge who’d probably give Valegro 7s across the board. E.g., multiply each score by, say, 0.9, when it’s clear that they’re scoring unnecessarily high. Obviously a pipe dream and there’s no way in hell judges would admit to their scoring being flawed…

[Dr_Doolittle]

Yes.

There IS “that one judge” in Area 2 who is excessively punitive, I’ve actually complained about her in evaluations.

Not sure whether she would regularly score people at 45+, but she is very stingy, hypercritical, and there are never any positive comments on any of the tests.

I’ve had personal dealings with this judge in a seller situation, and she is actually kind of like that in person as well – which is really unfortunate. Some people should just not be judges - no matter how competent or qualified they are. The vast majority of judges are constructive, fair, and reasonable – but there is always that one sour apple who can make or break a competition for riders.

[Beam_Me_Up]

That’s an interesting point about judge variability. In general I don’t care if I get the tough judge, because so does the rest of my division, so it doesn’t matter if the leader has a 20 or a 35. (Outside of minor stuff like TIP awards, or the USEA awards that are based on final scores.) But if you’re on the horse that averages a 42 and seeking a MER, it might.

[Jealoushe]

That’s not what I said at all but good job letting your anger over my opinion put words in my mouth. Considering I was one who had regular scores in the 50s!!! For years, it seems silly to say that’s what I think of riders who score 40s. My issues are with upgrading and my thoughts aren’t what you have listed.

Such distain for wanting people to ride better in dressage, why? Because I don’t agree with people upgrading for the sake of it when they can’t do a decent dressage test? You don’t have to agree with me but it seems extreme to attack me over it lol.

And you can pour the hate on me direct the hate towards me all you want but if you watched the FEI safety forum you’ll see asking for 45 for 6 events for an MER is nothing compared to what’s coming.

What’s potentially coming? Watch the seminars. Reverse MERS, as in MERS taken away. Red light green light system for upgrading. Going to be a lot more than just needing a 45 in dressage.

As for a bad score from a tough judge? It’s one test. So what you didn’t get an MER. Move on and try again.

[Marigold]

@Jealoushe

That’s not what I said at all … my thoughts aren’t what you have listed.

Respectfully: you can see the quotes from your posts directly in @subk’s. It is what you said. If your actual thoughts differ, I hope you’d consider wording things differently in the future, because when I read your posts I shared subk’s interpretation of your words.

@Jealoushe

if you watched the FEI safety forum you’ll see asking for 45 for 6 events for an MER is nothing compared to what’s coming.

What’s potentially coming? Watch the seminars. Reverse MERS, as in MERS taken away. Red light green light system for upgrading. Going to be a lot more than just needing a 45 in dressage.

I’m okay with all of this. A lot of this is predicated on things that we know are tied to safety - things like documented performance, especially in the cross country phase. I am so in favor of research-based rules that will make our sport safer.

What I am not in favor of is rules that are seemingly designed to keep riders competitive (that is not everyone’s goal), or rules designed to put more miles on horse’s legs or more dents in rider’s pocketbooks when there is no safety-related reason to do it. Equiratings has been saying for years that the emphasis on dressage is pushing our sport in a problematic direction - people are buying dressage horses and hoping they can get them over solid obstacles, rather than buying good jumpers and teaching them the flatwork. That is dangerous. People and horses will get hurt, and what social license our sport currently enjoys will dwindle. It is not the right focus.

Take away MERs and require re-qualification when performance drops off at a higher level, sure. Implement a red light/green light system based on safety metrics, no problem. Lowering the dressage score required for a minimum standard to within 5% of what would earn you a USDF medal? We’ve got bigger problems.

[Jealoushe]

Actually it’s not what I said or meant but if people are sensitive to the topic they take what they read however they want to.

Have you watched the seminars? It’s not about making it more competitive, it’s about protecting the image of the sport and creating a threshold of what they consider quality enough to upgrade. Social licensing IS important and I know posters here don’t seem to think it is, but that’s the number one priority in Eventing right now. Unfortunately for those who want to upgrade that means a slightly harder barrier. Is it really that big of a deal to score under 45 6 times???

Look I have 0 issue with someone who doesn’t agree with my point of view, but attacking me and my posts on a personal level saying I think all this stuff when I don’t is not conducive to anything, it’s just a poster trying to make another poster look bad. That post was just trying to chastise me for my opinion and didn’t actually input anything valuable to the discussion. I don’t see the point in acting that way.

I’m not on CoTH for that drama. I’m here to discuss things relative to the sport, not each other.

[Rnichols]

I can’t figure out how to quote from my phone, but the “it’s one test. Move on.” is a little harsh, no? This judge happens to always be at this venue so it’s not like you can just avoid it all together. I stand by what I said - a MER of 50 takes into account tough judging (coupled with a horse who already is a high 30s / maybe low 40s scorer), a 45 does not.

This same venue also has a judge who happens to score on the low side (there was a dressage score of 16 this weekend….). So I think consistent judging needs to be addressed.

[gardenie]

I think the seminar is tough to take. I am watching it, not even halfway through the first one. I don’t think people are understanding social license in the context of dressage. I am not sure how to put it in words, but bad dressage tests make poor images. Does dressage make horses jump better? No. Do horses that do bad dressage make bad xc horses? No. But dressage is part of the sport. Making the WHOLE sport more beautiful, the partnerships more apparent is our responsibility. Thinking on the idea that we can go train and show our horses in Central Park and not be worried about how we are doing things is part of gaining social license. I don’t think the 45 is about safety, it’s about where we need to go with our sport to keep it. And to keep all horse sports. I was not the poster child for dressage when I was younger. I just did stressage to get to xc. However, I grew up in a world that horses were still a commodity and disposable. They are not in this one. I agree that this divides us more and more away from the original sport where you could brush off old Dobbin and head over to the event, wander around the dressage court with his head bobbing, and go xc and stadium without a care in the world how you did it, just that you did.

[gardenie]

Judging does need to be reviewed. I can score 10 points more or less depending on judging. And judges need to be briefed on the 45 MER and be held accountable for scores that are not consistent. It may get to the point that dressage tests should be videoed and if they are over 45 they are reviewed for consistency if requested by the competitor.

[Highflyer1]

I think there’s a tremendous difference between a mediocre dressage test and one that will reflect badly on the sport to the general public, or even the non-dressage riding public. A tense horse that struggles with self-carriage (which can be said of many non-purpose bred horses) may struggle to get the required scores but isn’t going to hurt the perception of the sport in the way abuse or a jumping crash or even the horse that has 5+ rails on sj day of a 3-day will.

[Texarkana]

@gardenie

Judging does need to be reviewed. I can score 10 points more or less depending on judging. And judges need to be briefed on the 45 MER and be held accountable for scores that are not consistent. It may get to the point that dressage tests should be videoed and if they are over 45 they are reviewed for consistency if requested by the competitor.

Bold is mine. I think this is paramount. Overly critical judges or judging biases could cost the sport a lot. Someone shouldn’t waste their entire entry fee because their horse was tense and had a bobble in front of a harsh judge.

[EventerAJ]

I have a sinking feeling how much worse “at home, behind the barn” training will be if dressage scores become even more important. Ironically in the name of “social license.”

[beowulf]

Do we think that as the levels go above Prelim there is still that significant of judging inconsistencies in scores?

Asking as a smurf. There’s a judge in Area 1 I’ve known for decades that people call overly critical. I don’t mind riding in front of them but they are well-known to score coldly, especially if you’re on an off-breed. I don’t think they judge anything above Prelim, but I know on any given day my low 30s test would be a 40s with them. It makes me wonder what kind of balance shift this might place on riders to pick and choose their venues based on who is in the judges’ box. I know this happens already in my area with lower levels.

[EventerAJ]

It’s really hard for a competitor to pick and choose judges in FL. At least 3, up to 5 dressage rings running every event. You never really know who your judge will be before you show up. It’s common for POGJ to judge the highest level, but with multiple divisions at high levels it is basically impossible to “judge shop” at these events. You get who you get. I will say I think almost all our judges do an excellent job with minimal bias, fair scores and reasonable comments.

[Marigold]

@gardenie

I don’t think people are understanding social license in the context of dressage. I am not sure how to put it in words, but bad dressage tests make poor images. Does dressage make horses jump better? No. Do horses that do bad dressage make bad xc horses? No. … I don’t think the 45 is about safety, it’s about where we need to go with our sport to keep it.

I know this is a point that came up during the presentation, so I’m not directing this at you personally, but I think it’s fairly absurd to say that the social license of the sport is in jeopardy because of people allowed to count a 48 as an MER. There are broadly two groups of people who control the social license of the sport:

1. People who are not personally involved in or particularly educated about the sport itself, but care about animals and are keeping an eye out for perceived mistreatment (this is the larger, general public group)
2. People who are active participants with a nuanced understanding of the particulars that have a problem with specific practices in sport

The first group is not able to tell the difference between a 45 or a 50 test, and the second group understands that the difference between a 45 or a 50 has no correlation to safety whatsoever. I can’t see the justification that this rule helps retain social license with either group.

@gardenie

dressage is part of the sport. Making the WHOLE sport more beautiful, the partnerships more apparent is our responsibility.

This concerns me. You know what is beautiful? A dressage-bred horse doing dressage. Even if the shapes aren’t totally accurate, even if the rider is somewhat imprecise, a reasonably well-trained dressage bred horse is beautiful to watch on the flat. You know what is dangerous? A dressage-bred horse with little aptitude for jumping being asked to clear solid obstacles because if they happen to get around, the rider will win.

The current structure of the sport already creates too much pressure to try to get a dressage horse over the jumps in order to come away with that coveted win. We don’t need more. Event horses should not look like dressage horses. They should be accurate, they should be obedient, and they should be well-trained, but if they look like Valegro they either cost several hundreds of thousands of dollars or there are sacrifices in quality in other areas that are critical to safety, such as gallop or jump.

We need to have room for the blood horses in the sport, or the cross-bred - the safe jumping horses that move in an average way - and we need to have a little room for them to have the odd imperfect moment, or we are going to increase the pressure to choose increasingly inappropriate horses. Now that is a great way to lose our social license.

[beowulf]

Since I watched the presentation, I’ve been thinking a bit about an unspoken conundrum that exists in our sport (including Dressage) – and how it relates to social license.

The argument is “bad dressage” tests produce bad publicity, particularly if they happen to be photographed at a bad time. We have all seen things like ‘pain face’, behind the vertical and/or rolkur, ears back, grimacing, teeth exposed, excessive drooling, overtight nosebands, riding the curb, etc in these bad tests, and I think it’s what most of us think of when we think of bad publicity for the sport in the dressage phase.

But they’re also evident in our best dressage tests too:

(Both of these images are stills from tests that were either world breaking or most competitive)

The score seems an arbitrary metric to control the public image to me, when the problem exists across the whole curve and is not isolated to just the “bad dressage” horses. In my small pond I am seeing that these signs of tension are only punished in average or below average horses, but they are not punished in above average / dressage-type horses. Including my own. But I suppose from a social license standpoint, the former (average or bad mover) presents an overall ugly picture while the latter (elastic/good moving horse) presents an overall harmonious horse to the Peanut Gallery, even though horsemen can see right through it.

I agree that it is just furthering the trend towards pushing riders to seek dressage-bred horses, while moving further and further away from the heart of Eventing, which is cross country.

[fordtraktor]

Well one thing I am not worried about is concerns that we need to make eventing dressage scores softer. Honestly as an eventer turned DQ, they are already pretty darn soft usually. Be careful what you wish for because you might end up meshing more toward dressage standards and adding 10 pts to all your dressage scores….