Raising the Qualifying Score to Ride a Freestyle to 63...what say you?

[lorilu]

@Belowthesalt

,I completely agree with your comment about, WTF, if you want to ride a low level freestyle, do it. Those who will go on to attain National/International goals will do so whether lower level Ammies are forced to “qualify” to do freestyles or not. It’s addressing a problem that doesn’t exist.

I NEVER said or implied that anyone who wants to ride a freestyle should be able to. I made NO comment regarding that. Don’t put words in my mouth.

[pluvinel]

@soloudinhere

I am speaking specifically to the definition of the numerical scores - a 5 was sufficient at the time. Getting a 60 was considered very good into the 80s.

At the '78 world championships, American riders scored 61.1 and 62.70 in the team (62.3 and 58.5 in the individual). Considering that was the score range of the international team we fielded, logic follows that those would be considered fairly good scores for the time at the grand prix level.

And who is responsible for this “grade inflation”???

A meter that was measured in 1970 still measures a meter today. If 70% is the new 60%…then who is responsible moving the target and stretching this ruler?

Hint…The same people who are complaining. Why don’t the PTB fix their own show and improve judging to judge appropriately.

If not, then pretty soon 80% will be the new 70%…and pretty soon after that we will be scoring tests between 90% and 99%.

[Belowthesalt]

@lorilu

I NEVER said or implied that anyone who wants to ride a freestyle should be able to. I made NO comment regarding that. Don’t put words in my mouth.

I should have made separate paragraphs. But you did say something about it was okay to ride a lower level freestyle. That’s what I was agreeing with. The rest of the comment is my personal opinion; didn’t mean to imply that’s what you meant.

But I DO think anyone who wants to ride a freestyle should be able to. If it’s bad, it’s up to the judge to tell them so. Frankly, I do wonder at the minimum score requirement. For a championship or the like, sure. But at all the shows I’ve been to below championship level, to have 3-5 freestyle rides, at whatever level, would be unusual. Usually there’s 1 or two, at most three. It’s not like there are hordes of good/indifferent/bad riders clamoring to compete in freestyles at every recognized show. And I’m in a state with a high dressage profile.

[atr]

@pluvinel

And who is responsible for this “grade inflation”???

A meter that was measured in 1970 still measures a meter today. If 70% is the new 60%…then who is responsible moving the target and stretching this ruler?

Hint…The same people who are complaining. Why don’t the PTB fix their own show and improve judging to judge appropriately.

If not, then pretty soon 80% will be the new 70%…and pretty soon after that we will be scoring tests between 90% and 99%.

What is this thing about “score inflation?”

Do you not think that it is possible that the standard of riding, and the quality of the horses, in this country has increased quite a bit in the last 40 years? I certainly think it has, even in the last 20 years–especially out here in the boonies. So scores are going to increase, one would hope. Otherwise, the goalposts are indeed moving.

A 60 is still a 60. The 60 ride of yore was no different to the 60 ride of today of today. It was just the best we could offer up at the time, whereas today, with specialist horses, great trainers, more educated riders, we’d darned well better be offering up something better on the international scene.

The USDF should be celebrating their success.

Do we have a ways to go to catch up with the Europeans? Sure we do. But, you know, this is a young country. Dressage is hardly the only sphere in which we need to improve… Lets not mow down the grass roots of the sport and reduce it to an elitist hobby.

[SaddleFitterVA]

Now I see a problem with my Christmas gift from 2012 or so…of lifetime USDF membership, before the price went up.

I cannot withhold my dues for a year of protest! But, I sure do appreciate that membership when I go and renew USEF and USHJA.

[SaddleFitterVA]

https://www.usef.org/compete/resources-forms/rules-regulations/rule-changes

Any active member can propose a rule change. The link is on that page.

If enough active USEF members start submitting the same, proposed rule change, it might get a little more attention than Facebook threads and COTH threads.

[Cowgirl]

Scores of “5” have never been desirable or acceptable to rest on. I have always understood that you are not ready to move up until you get 65s (and I remember that from 20 years ago).
I really didn’t link to JF’s show record to bash her, but simply to point out the irony that the people asking for this change would not have been able to meet the standard.

[dotneko]

@atr

What is this thing about “score inflation?”

Do you not think that it is possible that the standard of riding, and the quality of the horses, in this country has increased quite a bit in the last 40 years? I certainly think it has, even in the last 20 years–especially out here in the boonies. So scores are going to increase, one would hope. Otherwise, the goalposts are indeed moving.

A 60 is still a 60. The 60 ride of yore was no different to the 60 ride of today of today. It was just the best we could offer up at the time, whereas today, with specialist horses, great trainers, more educated riders, we’d darned well better be offering up something better on the international scene.

The USDF should be celebrating their success.

Do we have a ways to go to catch up with the Europeans? Sure we do. But, you know, this is a young country. Dressage is hardly the only sphere in which we need to improve… Lets not mow down the grass roots of the sport and reduce it to an elitist hobby.

Not really true. In the old days, a count mistake in a line of tempis, a count mistake in a zig zag, not enough piaffe steps, a bobble in a lengthening all were automatic 4s. And the tests were more technically difficult. At least in my opinion.

[soloudinhere]

@Cowgirl

Scores of “5” have never been desirable or acceptable to rest on. I have always understood that you are not ready to move up until you get 65s (and I remember that from 20 years ago).
I really didn’t link to JF’s show record to bash her, but simply to point out the irony that the people asking for this change would not have been able to meet the standard.

And everyone else pointed out to you that she wasn’t riding the same tests, so it’s a moot point. See dotneko’s opinion above, which I would hold as valid since she was riding at that level during the time in question.

20 years ago was 1999. We are talking about early 1980s.

[xQHDQ]

@SaddleFitterVA

https://www.usef.org/compete/resources-forms/rules-regulations/rule-changes

Any active member can propose a rule change. The link is on that page.

If enough active USEF members start submitting the same, proposed rule change, it might get a little more attention than Facebook threads and COTH threads.

Done. I used their own words and changed 63% to 60%. If enough of us do this, maybe they will listen.
Here’s the reference to the current rule: DR129.9 Musical Freestyle Ride.

[Badger]

Since the introduction of half points in dressage, has there been a quantitative study to decide if scores HAVE in fact gone up a few points?

I think there are a lot of performances where the movements don’t make it to a 7 and have never and will never get rewarded with a 7. The judges used to give ALL of those a 6 or lower. and now a portion of the time they are giving a 6.5 instead because they have that option now.

So maybe there is something behind the old 60 being the new 63. Maybe not. I’d love to see something quantitative on how the half points affect scoring trends.

[soloudinhere]

@Badger

Since the introduction of half points in dressage, has there been a quantitative study to decide if scores HAVE in fact gone up a few points?

I think there are a lot of performances where the movements don’t make it to a 7 and have never and will never get rewarded with a 7. The judges used to give ALL of those a 6 or lower. and now a portion of the time they are giving a 6.5 instead because they have that option now.

So maybe there is something behind the old 60 being the new 63. Maybe not. I’d love to see something quantitative on how the half points affect scoring trends.

I did read a study relatively recently (published this year, I think) that basically indicated that statistically, there is a huge variance in dressage scoring at both the bottom and the top of the range of scores, in other words, that judges basically can’t agree on what is really bad or really good. That leaves a pretty tight midrange and the half points impact that midrange quite a lot - so I would totally believe that the half points do impact raising the overall scores in that midrange where most scores fall. If you added a half point to every non coefficient score in 2nd-3 for example (incl the non-coefficient collectives) your score would go from a 60 to a 62.2. If you added a half point to every movement incl the collectives, you would go from a 60 to a 63.8.

[MysticOakRanch]

@Badger

Since the introduction of half points in dressage, has there been a quantitative study to decide if scores HAVE in fact gone up a few points?

I think there are a lot of performances where the movements don’t make it to a 7 and have never and will never get rewarded with a 7. The judges used to give ALL of those a 6 or lower. and now a portion of the time they are giving a 6.5 instead because they have that option now.

So maybe there is something behind the old 60 being the new 63. Maybe not. I’d love to see something quantitative on how the half points affect scoring trends.

Oh, I don’t think it has really done that - I can remember scribing when the judges gave “little 7s”, and even a time when there were + and - next to some of the 7s. A little 7 would be a 6.5 now - which means the score is actually LOWER. In fact, I was just scribing a few of weekends ago, and we were discussing the old little 7s.

The only reason I see scores coming up from the 80s is that riding and horses are SO much better. Of course, with fancier horses, then people with the not-fancy horses are at the greater disadvantage.

And anyone who thinks 50 was acceptable in the 80s - no, it was not. 50 has always been a bad score. Our riding quality has improved so much. Our team riders “way back when” would not be competitive today - they were cutting edge for US dressage riders back then, but times have changed, riding has improved a LOT. Horses are SO much fancier (and more expensive!). There is no score creep - actually, I think some of the judges are tougher now because expectations are higher.

@soloudinhere

so I would totally believe that the half points do impact raising the overall scores in that midrange where most scores fall. If you added a half point to every non coefficient score in 2nd-3 for example (incl the non-coefficient collectives) your score would go from a 60 to a 62.2. If you added a half point to every movement incl the collectives, you would go from a 60 to a 63.8.

But you are assuming half points make judges score higher - it just as often works the other way - where the judge says, ohhh, that is no longer a “small 7”, that is a 6.5. So the rider loses .5 Technically, if the judge went UP a half point on each movement, that would be 5% increase, and if they went DOWN a half point on each movement, that would be a 5% decrease. I scribe enough to know that the judges are just as likely going DOWN from a small 7 to a 6.5.

[ToN_Farm]

@MysticOakRanch

Oh, I don’t think it has really done that - I can remember scribing when the judges gave “little 7s”, and even a time when there were + and - next to some of the 7s. A little 7 would be a 6.5 now - which means the score is actually LOWER. In fact, I was just scribing a few of weekends ago, and we were discussing the old little 7s.

<respectfully snipped>

But you are assuming half points make judges score higher - it just as often works the other way - where the judge says, ohhh, that is no longer a “small 7”, that is a 6.5. So the rider loses .5 Technically, if the judge went UP a half point on each movement, that would be 5% increase, and if they went DOWN a half point on each movement, that would be a 5% decrease. I scribe enough to know that the judges are just as likely going DOWN from a small 7 to a 6.5.

That is your personal experience. Mine is different and goes back much farther than yours. I have never had nor seen others get a plus or minus by the mark. Furthermore, 7’s were not nearly so common even just 20 years ago. I am not thinking about the uber horses getting the 80%'s. I am thinking above the ‘average/typical’ AA riding at 1st-3rd. A mark of 6.5 is very very common. I believe prior to the half point it would have been a 6. Judges used to be very stingy about giving out a 7. A study wouldn’t prove anything because those that think like you would say the higher scores were due to better horses and riders. And really, what is going on with marks of 4.5? How ridiculous is that. We have 10 marks. There is no reason for the half point imo.

In any case, I don’t see a problem with raising the requirement for medals, freestyles, regionals, or anything else.

Edited to add: I think if there were to be a study, it would show that the most common mark on all tests is 6.5. There is no way that prior to the half point that would have been a 7.

[right_horse_at_the_right_time]

They should Open that to non-members… I mean past members who are debating rejoining…too.

[soloudinhere]

If someone on our international team got a 58 in international competition at the world championships, that is by the very definition a “good score” since it was the best we could field on the team. That person would not even remotely be in high performance contention now, never mind make a team.

[pluvinel]

@MysticOakRanch

…Our team riders “way back when” would not be competitive today - they were cutting edge for US dressage riders back then, but times have changed, riding has improved a LOT. Horses are SO much fancier (and more expensive!). There is no score creep - actually, I think some of the judges are tougher now because expectations are higher.

Part of the problem is that “the ruler”…eg. the guidelines for judging dressage, has been radically changed. The big change was when gaits started to be factored in to all the movements rather than being allocated one box in the score for the Collective Marks.

So asking someone who doesn’t have the “right sports equipment” (eg., a horse with bling gaits) is asking for someone to compete and make a qualifying score with a big disadvantage…especially at the lower levels.

I would also add to this that the horses that were ridden in the 1970’s were still basically TB’s…of which Hilda Gurney’s Keen is an example.
https://www.uset.org/home/americas-t…medal-history/

1932 - All horses were TB’s
http://sill-www.army.mil/firesbullet…LL_EDITION.pdf [INDENT]Capt. Isaac Kitts (American Lady)
Capt. Alvin Moore (Water Pat)
Capt. Hiram Tuttle (Olympic)[/INDENT]

1936 - Capt. Earl Thomson on Jenny Camp - Part-TB
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenny_Camp

1948 - Last Olympics ridden by US Cavalry [INDENT]Lt. Robert Borg (Klingsor) - Hanoverian, former German Cavalry Horse
Lt. Col. Frank Henry (Reno Overdo) - Army Remount
Col. Earl Thomson (Pancraft) - Army Remount (they are, for the most part, half Thoroughbred or better, the result of careful selection from the U.S. Remount breeding and purchasing program.[/INDENT]

1955 Pan-Am Games: Maj. Robert Borg (Bill Biddle) Trak/Tb (Airolo xx, out of Apfelblste by Poseidon)
https://www.usdf.org/halloffame/indu…files/borg.asp

Rath Patrick xx, ridden by Patricia Galvin, [INDENT]team silver 1959 PanAm Games
won at Aachen,
placed 6th in the 1960 Olympic Games,
placed 8th in Tokyo in 1964,
won the Pan American Games twice (1959 & 1963).[/INDENT]

Perhaps others have other sources…but when I started to ride in the 1970’s, warmbloods were rare and TB’s were the horse everyone was riding in US dressage.

[kelo]

@Belowthesalt

Probably the judge who said in an article “I’m tired of seeing horses come down the center line that look like they should be out chasing cattle.” (Not “tired of seeing horses coming down the center line dumped on the forehand,” a statement with which few would argue, but a specific slam against non-WB types)

Or perhaps the judge who said that people should not tell her that a $5,000 is all they can afford for a horse. They pay $32,000 for a car, so get a cheaper car and a more expensive horse. (Ignoring the fact that (a) many people already have the cheapest car/truck they can afford; and (b) a car usually doesn’t go out the pasture and break a leg a couple of days after you buy it.)

Weren’t those the same judge, in the same opinion piece? It was a real classic. Someone needs to go find that – wasn’t it a DT article? – and post it somewhere so all of us poor, cattle-chasing amateurs can admire it.

[SnicklefritzG]

We should all defect and go over to working equitation where team events include a sorting component with cattle

@kelo

Weren’t those the same judge, in the same opinion piece? It was a real classic. Someone needs to go find that – wasn’t it a DT article? – and post it somewhere so all of us poor, cattle-chasing amateurs can admire it.

[Sticky_Situation]

@pluvinel

Perhaps others have other sources…but when I started to ride in the 1970’s, warmbloods were rare and TB’s were the horse everyone was riding in US dressage.

Warmbloods themselves have also changed drastically from what they were 50 years ago. Back then they tended to be heavier boned types that were bred to be versatile, utilitarian horses … horses that would look like plow horses next to today’s extravagant moving specialists.