Who made the comment? Could you send me the link?
To me, no, 63% is not the new 55%… but with the half-points, yes the scores have changed a bit, not to that extend.
1 Like
Raising the bar is going to kill showing and turn a lot of people away. Here’s why in my opinion…
Under the original system, I qualified to do a freestyle at First level not too long ago with a score that was above 60%, but not above 63%. While I would like to continue raising my scores even higher, I don’t have unlimited funds for showing at recognized shows. Under the new system, I wouldn’t show more. I’d show less. Why? I’d stay home and not do additional showing, at least at the recognized shows, until I was certain I had an excellent chance of scoring ~65%, a few points above the new cutoff in order to account for show nerves for rider and/or horse, etc.
When I look at what it costs do show recognized after taking account trailering (ie gas), entry fees, drug fee, office fee, and all manner of other fees, I’d be better off taking schoolmaster lessons. So that’s what I did. I continued showing my horse in eventing and jumpers, took dressage lessons on him as well as a GP schoolmaster and a year later was schooling 2nd and 3rd. Then when I went back in the ring, I was high 60’s.
It was a tough call in some ways because I enjoy showing. It’s also a valuable way to get a horse out and help them deal with a busy environment. Showing is a completely different animal from training because you have to take nerves and atmosphere into account which is not the same when you are riding at home in a familiar environment.
Showing is expensive, it can be difficult for people to get out depending on where they live. Not everyone lives in an area where they can go to a recognized show every weekend or even have multiple shows to choose from. Some have to drive several hours to get to anything or turn it into a long weekend after taking a friday or a monday off in order to travel to the show,
We aren’t Germany and never will be. Score levels should be left where they are.
the new rule is only going to push people away from showing, unless they have unlimited funds to keep trying at the shows.
Makes it look like the powers that be are saying one of two things:
- don’t show up and even attempt to show in our rings unless you are capable of a decent score
- we don’t want the grassroots people in our rings unless they have unlimited funds to keep trying over and over in order to meet the new score level.
15 Likes
It didn’t make you turn away.
You took better lessons, improved your riding and came back stronger at the right level.
I’d stay home and not do additional showing, at least at the recognized shows, until I was certain I had an excellent chance of scoring ~65%, a few points above the new cutoff in order to account for show nerves for rider and/or horse, etc.
And what about showing down a level and build on that to get great scores before moving up?
You could have easily done a solid Training level freestyle.
I’d be better off taking schoolmaster lessons. So that’s what I did. I continued showing my horse in eventing and jumpers, took dressage lessons on him as well as a GP schoolmaster and a year later was schooling 2nd and 3rd. Then when I went back in the ring, I was high 60’s.
And this is what people should do.
Showing more doesn’t improve scores if the training stays the same.
Train better.
Don’t go in the ring at a level you don’t think you can be in the 60%s.
Find the appropriate level for your horse and you.
A bad day can happen but even if it’s about show nerves, maybe you (general) should be better showing at a lower level until the confidence kicks in.
It was a tough call in some ways because I enjoy showing. It’s also a valuable way to get a horse out and help them deal with a busy environment. Showing is a completely different animal from training because you have to take nerves and atmosphere into account which is not the same when you are riding at home in a familiar environment.
the new rule is only going to push people away from showing, unless they have unlimited funds to keep trying at the shows.
Don’t keep trying… Find better education. Find other ways to improve.
If you did your best and earned 55% at a show, you are not at the right level. Either show in a lower level or seek help with the training.
Makes it look like the powers that be are saying one of two things:
- don’t show up and even attempt to show in our rings unless you are capable of a decent score.
No. Ride at the right level where you can get that decent score.
- we don’t want the grassroots people in our rings unless they have unlimited funds to keep trying over and over in order to meet the new score level.
No. Train better and ride at the right level. You’ll get the new score level.
You did what people should do.
Train better in order to get better scores.
What’s the point of showing in a ring where you know you’ll get scores in the 50s?
6 Likes
Alibi,
I think your interpretation of what I said was completely off the mark and missed the point.
The point is, a lot of people will stop showing or greatly reduce showing as a result of cutoffs going higher.
We are not Germany and never will be. We don’t want a qualifying system like they have, the size of our country and the expense of showing won’t support it. Nor will it support a veiled attempt at instilling one by raising the bar on qualifying scores for freestyles. If it’s starts there it won’t stop IMO.
Your use of the word “you” better have been a general “you” because I’ve never got below 60%.
and your opinion that I should have gone for a training level freestyle is ridiculous. Who are you to determine what is correct for me and my horse? outrageous and rude.
your attitude is no better than that of the powers that be that basically don’t want people to try in the ring and are pushing grassroots people away from showing.
7 Likes
I also believe raising the bar will discourage AA riders and lower show revenue…not a good impact in the long run
7 Likes
Rather than raise the score, maybe allow less lengthy freestyle. If the average intro test time allowed is 5 minutes ( I’m guessing that figure) then the freestyle should be that short. What are the current parameters?
2 Likes
Five minutes from salute to salute is the current maximum time, already. Your introduction/entry can be as long as you want, and I will say I have definitely seen a few lower level freestyles with much too long an entrance. In my opinion — and chances are in the opinion of the judges, too. You don’t want to give the impression that it’s taking forever to get started, before you have even gotten to your first salute.
But five minutes is about as short as they can be to still fit in all the requirements. I believe it was three or four show seasons ago that they were shortened by 30 seconds from 5 1/2 minutes. And the FEI freestyles are still 5 1/2 minutes.
Given the problems I’ve had (and seen others have) with music this year, I wouldn’t risk running a freestyle without entrance music. It gives you the chance to stop (before entering the ring) and have things fixed. That said, mine only last from B/E until I get to my halts at D - so it isn’t a lengthy piece of music.
Rather than fix a problem that doesn’t really exist, how about allowing submission of music by email or USB drive?
As I pointed out, it didn’t stopped you from showing.
Yes, you took some time off but came back stronger.
If this new rule had come into effect, you could have decided to take some time off and get better instruction or go down a level and performed better.
Both situation would have improved your riding.
and there is nothing wrong with Training level. It’s actually the level people should take time to master because it’s all about the basics. It’s your warmup, it’s your every day hack, it’s where you go back when you feel any tension.
We are not Germany and never will be. We don’t want a qualifying system like they have, the size of our country and the expense of showing won’t support it. Nor will it support a veiled attempt at instilling one by raising the bar on qualifying scores for freestyles. If it’s starts there it won’t stop IMO.
If there was qualifying scores in place, we would see less riders in wrong classes.
People would have to ride better.
It’s also being fair to our horses.
I’ve scribed and been involved enough to realize that there is a lot of people who don’t understand what the levels are about.
Your use of the word “you” better have been a general “you” because I’ve never got below 60%.
and your opinion that I should have gone for a training level freestyle is ridiculous. Who are you to determine what is correct for me and my horse? outrageous and rude.
:rolleyes: Sensitive much? Of course the « you » was general… and it included myself in the lot…
What is outrageous and rude is thinking that Training level is above you…
It’s with that kind of attitude that we encounter riders like the DelMar one… I bought a PSG horse? Let’s do PSG!
I got a 60% at Training? Let’s move to 1st level! My horse does its change? Let’s try for 3rd! I can put a double bridle on and voilà!
And you get riders in the low 60%- high 50%… and worse.
And you get riders frustrated because the judges are unfair, harsh, don’t understand the situation, and all the other excuses…
And you see freestyles where no one knows what is going on…
Have you ever seen judges having a little meeting at C after a freestyle (or talking through walkies)? That’s usually to decide if X or Y movement was seen… or not.
There is a lot of « wait until the end to find what that was supposed to be »…
Judges don’t like to give bad marks… and sometimes they have to improvise as in « it must have been that ».
And I believe that’s why they might want to increase the qualifying score. To get something a little more consistent in term of quality.
your attitude is no better than that of the powers that be that basically don’t want people to try in the ring and are pushing grassroots people away from showing.
On the contrary. I’m not saying they shoudn’t try. I’m saying they should get better at the level they are, or go down a notch, before attempting to present a freestyle that will showcase their hardwork.
Isn’t it way more appealing to present a decent freestyle that shows off all the good training one was able to do?
Getting a 63% shouldn’t be that out of reach if one usually score in the 60%.
But, it’s just my opinion after all.
6 Likes
I think it’s silly, but I’ve made it clear I think there should be more focus on correctness, rather than flash equaling good gaits. I don’t mind gaits being scored - just that it’s not CORRECT gaits being rewarded, it’s big gaits whether correct or not. (And yes, I have scribed many times when horses who were flashy got lower scores on extended trot due to not being correct… but those scores were typically still higher than the “average” horse would get when everything was correct.)
With my 8 year old, I aim for scores over 60. Her trot is developing into more of a 7+ at home, and we only show once the level is easy for her at home, but get her to a show with some tension and her gait quality decreases. I’m not going to show lower than a level that’s already easy for her and she’s schooling a bit above. And I don’t show enough to keep showing a lower level just to get scores higher before moving up when she’s working well above what we’re showing.
With my youngster, I will aim for scores over 70. Same as with the older mare, I won’t always GET the goal scores. But same training, same rider, I will expect far higher scores simply because of innate quality of the gaits as far as what judges are looking for. I’ll have the same standard of schooling above the level and showing a level which is easy for my horse. And get very different results.
3 Likes
Your posts are very rude. Please move on. You are taking what people say out of context, ignoring the points they are making.
There is nothing “outrageous” or “rude” about me showing at first and not training. It is disengenuous of you to suggest I was being rude by showing at first level.
3 Likes
I don’t think anyone would advocate riding with no entrance music at all and I’m not sure it’s even allowed.
… I’ve never said or implied that… :rolleyes:
But whatever…
4 Likes
I’m not particularly interested in riding a freestyle myself, so am ambivalent about the qualifying score debate. I recognize that going from 60% to 63% can be challenging for many people, as I know several folks who were stuck in 58-59% land when needing just one more score at 60% for a medal.
I realize that USEF and USDF are pretty much the only games in town regarding national organizations for getting awards, recognition etc in dressage. That said, it doesn’t stop people from putting in the time and energy to form their own clubs as did the Western Dressage people. Now that’s a motivated and effective group of people!
If you don’t like the rules of the organization, you can get involved with that organization to try to chart the course, or you can form a competing organization. There have been many many threads on this forum talking about the need for a more “friendly” approach to dressage showing. I suspect what quickly happens is that people figure out it is a boatload of work to create something from the ground level and be competitive with the machine of existing national organizations and their many programs. Again, hats off to the Western Dressage folks for taking that on.
One has to wonder about the viability of an approach where an individual, or even several individuals, try to change a much larger organization and get the standards changed so they can play. I know people will take offense to that but can’t think of a more polite way to articulate the point so apologies in advance. I just know I’m not going to take my warmblood to an AQHA show, expect them to let me enter and then pin me first in Western Pleasure even though I’m in the West and my horse is a pleasure to ride. My horse and I do not meet that organization’s standards for that class.
Yes, it sucks to really want to compete at a certain level and be frustrated whether it’s by lack of talent (rider or horse), lack of funds, or just lack of opportunity. Been there, have the T-shirt.
2 Likes
In my area, it’s already fairly normal for riders to be showing a Freestyle at a level below what they’re showing in regular tests at the same show.
I don’t think there’s any shame in that-- I don’t even think about it, really. This new rule requiring 3% higher at the highest test may increase the numbers of people in that subset. Say, riding Second Level tests two days, still showing a First Level Freestyle one of the days. And a nice thing about Freestyles is that, as you become more proficient you can increase the level of difficulty to some degree within the same level. It’s fun to do it a few times and experiment a bit, as you become a better team.
As someone trying to go up the levels showing both regular tests and Freestyles, I choose what classes make sense for me at any given weekend. I assume others who are doing Freestyles are making their own decisions based on what makes sense for their abilities and not on some sense of what they’re “supposed” to be showing once they’ve achieved a particular score.
Maybe it’s too many people doing the latter that have spurred judges to seek the change. People who just barely achieved the requirements and who look overfaced when putting the geometry to music. I haven’t seen much of that, but I have only competed in two States, CA and AZ. The judges go all over of course, so they probably have a different view.
5 Likes
Regarding “score inflation” … wasn’t the descriptor for a 5 changed somewhere along the lines from “sufficient” (which is what I remember it being when I showed as a kid) to “marginal”? I think the connotation is a bit different… “sufficient” sounds as though it is “good enough,” if just barely, whereas “marginal” sounds as though it really doesn’t quite meet the standard.
Although, even when I was competing as a kid, 60% or higher seemed to be what to shoot for to know that you’re on the right track.
2 Likes
Yes, actually you did. You are just angry that you got called out on it. lol
And it still is for a horse with normal gaits.
Dressage has always been a sport which helps improve horses, and still is. However, the advent of horses with large gaits who move in a more dramatic fashion and lack of requiring those gaits to be correct to award high scores has changed average scores. Raising the bar for what must be achieved with normal horses seems totally unfair to me.
And I’ll repeat that with my younger horse I’ll be aiming for 70%, not 60%, because of her gaits - so it’s not sour grapes on my part. My older mare may have more talent for the upper level work - I won’t know about the youngster for several years. But the youngster will by default have higher scores for similar work.
8 Likes
No, actually @alibi_18 did not say that. What alibi did say was in fact the opposite, that it was not only OK, but actually recommended in her opinion to ride freestyles a level below that which one regularly shows. Alibi also gave you credit for improving your training.
Sheesh! :rolleyes:
9 Likes
I know I have seen FSs here in Florida, at recognized competitions in Wellington (should be great, right??) where the horse BARELY meets the level requirements. Trust me, the music doesn’t make it better. The riders shopped judges to get the 60% so they could ride the FS - and earned the score deserved in the FS. FSs are MUCH harder than the “regular” test -
I suggest you seek out quality schooling shows to “get a horse out” etc. You can also ride your FS there and perfect it while you are working on raising your test scores until you reach that magic number.
Regarding “we don’t want grassroots people in our rings…” well, those going for medals or All-Breed awards are in the same boat - you need scores above a certain level to qualify, so you keep going aback and trying.
Set goals. Work towards them.
4 Likes
