USEA posted a video of a BN rider who scored a 15 this past weekend, and I remember not long ago that breaking 20 was considered near-mythical - now it seems like a weekly occurrence.
There are several old threads discussing this phenomenon, and I’m wondering if a) we are getting that much better at dressage or b) judges are over-scoring.
FWIW, the 15 was at a small event in the Wyoming, not hyper-competitive Area II, so I’m wondering we should take this into account.
It looks like an extremely nice test, ridden by a good, experienced rider on a lovely, experienced horse-- at BN where the test is extremely basic. I actually often see horses that are competitive at recognized dressage shows at 2nd or 3rd level come to starter or low level recognized events in Area 2 and put in extremely nice tests only to get decent but not brilliant scores (high 20s or low 30s) and sometimes be beaten by much greener horses with nice well ridden tests but green mistakes. I think that there should probably be more very low (and very high) scores at the starter through novice levels.
I think the quality of tests has improved. If you watch old event videos the tests look more polished overall. Riders are more educated than ever before.
It’s also great judges are willing to give good scores too. They should reward good riding when they see it. A 10 doesn’t have to be perfect, it’s just “excellent”.
To play devil’s advocate – and to the point by the OP - why does it seem that eventing dressage scores are so much “better” (numerically) than straight dressage
scores at local shows?
In regular dressage, scores in the mid to high 60s are pretty darn good and will generally secure a medal (at the appropriate levels), but in eventing, you may not even place if you finish on that score: 32-36.
Let me amend that to “recently.“
I could only see the few seconds in the clip - although he’s got lovely gaits and rhythm, he looks a bit behind the vertical - something many judges will crucify for.
The rest of the division went from 15.6 and 25.0 for second and third place after dressage down to 41.2.
In the dressage world, 10s are supposed to be rare and near perfection (as it should be, 100%). No one I know has ever gotten a 10 on a walk-trot transition during a dressage show!
Yes, there’s definitely been a lot of improvement over time (and the horses have gotten fancier, on average) but that’s true of straight dressage too and you still don’t see a ton of 80%s, whereas 20s aren’t uncommon. On the flip side, a 40 will put you at the bottom of your division whereas a 60% can be perfectly respectable. I would love to know why. I think they must be getting trained a bit differently, though I wonder in what way. Is the baseline score encouraged to be higher? Are the negative modifiers emphasized less? Do they even use basics +/- criteria +/- modifiers? I did Part 1 of the L Program and the scoring I see at events is generally not consistent with how they teach scoring. Some eventing dressage judges may have gone through the L Program, but it’s not a requirement. I actually know an eventing dressage judge in training and an eventing dressage judge instructor, so I just have to figure out how to ask them these questions without sounding like a snobby dressage queen lol.
Am I wrong that eventing dressage tests don’t have the same amount of coefficients and collective marks as straight dressage tests anymore? I would think that would definitely make scores trend higher.
ETA: I tried to mathematically reason my claim and disproved my own hypothesis… sort of.
I hypothetically scored a prelim test against a first level test (I just filled in 8s straight down both scoresheets and tallied the scores), and if you did equivalently on both, your numerical score earned would be higher on the USDF test.
However, there are a lot more opportunities to gain points on the USDF tests, which also means there are a lot more opportunities to lose points. More room to nitpick in scoring.
Correction.
It is VERY competitive at this show in Wyoming and it is one of the largest draw’s in the region for its spring and summer events and clinics.
Competitors and their coaches are regulars in the winter in Florida, the fall and early spring in California and summers in Utah, Arizona, Texas and Kansas.
It wasn’t that long ago that Area II treated California with the same attitude. I thought maybe this year’s Kentucky win might have fixed that…
I can attest to the eventing judge’s program using the basics +/- criteria +/- modifiers metric. That was definitely discussed during the dressage sessions. We also had Linda Zang as one of our instructors, which was a wonderful opportunity and learning experience.
I have not gone through the L program, although it is on my list of ‘would like to dos’ so I don’t have a good basis to compare the two.
Interesting!
I’m confused. So if you scored straight 8s on a USDF test, including all collectives, that would be an 80, right? And in eventing, a 20? Or do the collectives behave differently?
To the bigger question, I agree that eventing scores trend more generous. There is a higher percentage of eventers receiving <30 than dressage riders receiving >70. But “too low” implies a problem. The lowest score wins, so whether that’s a 15 or a 30, we hope the division is ordered correctly.
I guess a possible problem is that lower scores could make jumping more influential (each rail / time fault is a larger % of the final score). That ratio has changed over time (the FEI coefficient, the old tests where scores were not reverse %), though, and we never seem to agree on balance.
You are right 
(laughing at myself- I was up all night with a sick kid and logic wasn’t working)
I applied a coefficient when I shouldn’t on the USDF test.
But the fact remains that you do have more opportunities to both earn and lose points on a USDF test thanks to more collective marks and coefficients. So it can work either way for you.
That doesn’t explain the fact that 70s and even 80s (eventing scores of 20s and even teens) have become the standard to win at eventing yet an eventer is unlikely to ever score like that on an equivalent USDF test.
When you look at results from OLD, long format events of years past, dressage scores were insane.
Results from 1993:
I spy a cother with an eventing dressage penalty of 63. 
(she finished 7th out of a ton of entrants! 63 was a pretty good score!)
What changed besides the format? Obviously XC lost a lot of its impact on scoring and the type of horse changed drastically because of that. While I had a toe in the eventing world in the 90s, I really didn’t understand scoring back then… not like I do today with the ability to look everything up online.
It makes no sense to compare Eventing penalty points for dressage in 1993 with today. The formula was VERY different.
" The average of good marks is subtracted from the maximum good marks obtainable… then multiplied by 0.6"
Without knowing the “Maximum good marks” for a specific test, there is no way to convert a 1993 Eventing dressage score to a percentage (as used for straight dressage)
Thanks, that’s what I was asking when I said “what changed besides the format”- clearly things were scored differently, I just didn’t remember how. I’m not sure I ever really knew. You rarely saw these numbers unless you checked the scores posted at the office. I don’t even remember if COTH or anyone published them.
Unless you worked as a scorer! (as I did)
That’s a very cool experience.
I do remember they would put them on the screen in the VHS tapes you could buy from the biggest of events. 
But it wasn’t like today when you’re watching them refresh on the screen in the live scores.
I think as long as the scoring is consistent, it’s OK. My biggest gripe is the difference in scoring between judges. Some judges will have, say, one sub-30 score in their divisions, where as other judges will have scores going to 10th place in the 20s. Maybe I’m just grumpy because I always seem to get the tough judge lately, I don’t know
Okay, no need to get snippy. I said that because in Area 2, you’re more likely to end up in an open novice (or novice horse) division with three WEG riders than you are anywhere else. I’m not doubting you have top tier riders in your area, but nowhere near the number that you’re likely to go up against out east. Thank for rider and amateur divisions for that reason.
Also, no idea who started this idea that east coast riders treated west coast with “attitude” - it rather sounds like they were projecting.
Bruce Davidson.
I’m laughing, but I’m also dead serious that he has consistently been one of the loudest pro-Area 2 voices.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
