The question that goes hand in hand with the one already being discussed then is, if the USDF has tried to bridge this gap (with what IME seem like good ideas), why aren’t those ideas sticking? I have some thoughts about this, but I wonder what others think about these initiatives failing.
This has only been the case since fairly recently…circa the early 1990’s.
Before that time, the “Gaits” only were judged in the Collective Marks. It was this “guidance” to the judges to include the gaits in every movement that turned the tide.
Dr. Max Gawhyler wrote an excellent article back in the days of Dressage & CT Magazine that showed how a horse with bling gaits would always win against a well-trained, but less spectacularly moving animal when gaits are factored into every movement.
Perhaps folks with old copies of Dressage & CT might be able to find the article.
3 Likes
Yes, but… It didn’t USE to be that way. Those of us who have been around for a long time know that the judging standard changed. The tests themselves changed - back in the “good ol’ days”, every single movement directive did NOT start with “quality of the gaits”. And as the gait component became more and more heavily weighted, we saw the membership numbers, the participation numbers, and the volunteer numbers drop. We saw the lower level classes shrinking. So the standards changed, creating a more exclusive environment - and the grass roots membership fell away…
10 Likes
Yes, I know this. I was stating the current directives. The other poster didn’t seem to know.
The riders tests would really be a way to essentially make two divisions. It’s a pity that didn’t catch on…maybe they could be reframed and resurrected.
OK, I’ll try again, did you not see the quotes around the word sides in my post? They indicate that I was not literally talking about sides, think of their use as shorthand for: the so-called sides.
Frankly, your’s was the first post that explicitly identified any kind of side (note the lack of quotes), everyone else (well mostly everyone else) was having a discussion expressing a range of perspectives.
Did you miss this?
That was me and @pluvinel modeling a civil conversation. Anyone who’s been on this site for any length of time knows we are rarely in complete agreement, yet we can have a civil conversation.
Have you seen anyone discussing the standard, perhaps even supporting it post vitriol like this?
If you only want to see discussion that is in agreement with your own perspective, perhaps an internet forum is not the appropriate venue. There is also the ability to block people on this site.
I will offer one piece of advice to anyone wanting to affect meaningful change on a large organization such as USDF; insults and raging emotion (as opposed to passion) are ineffective.
3 Likes
I guess calling them “Rider Tests” would be a misnomer then. Maybe it was a marketing failure.
If dressage is to be a test of the horse’s training, then calling the tests a “Horse Test” would have been more appropriate.
But I still don’t understand why the move to change to include gaits in every movement score was introduced in the first place. What was broken that needed this fix?
Just for historical reference…in the “olden days” you had the dressage test of the movements, then followed by the 4 collective marks that allowed the judge to insert an assessment of the horse (and rider) into this equation. In the past the Collectives were
- Paces and Regularity (changed to just Gaits)
- Submission
- Impulsion
- Riders Position and Seat
I don’t disagree with your points and was not saying that the system is perfect but rather describing why I believe it is what it is. No judgement on whether it is good or bad. Yes, the standard is biased towards WB movement. Yes, the tests are biased also because gaits are included in every single score. Unless the governing organizations decide to change that bias, those are the rules of the game.
The question is whether USDF thinks they need that part of the membership that feels disenfranchised. I have no idea whether they do. I know you are personally involved in trying to make changes. Maybe USDF is not sustainable in it’s current form, maybe you’re better at future forecasting and identifying signposts. If USDF doesn’t think they need that part of the membership, there’s no motivation for change.
I keep pointing out WDAA as an example of real game changers. Recognizing the market for Western Dressage, getting that organization up and running, is a super example of entrepreneurship and hard work. We both are familiar with the failed DASC experiment. It takes much more than throwing ideas out on the internet to make change happen. (I know you know this).
1 Like
If memory serves, it was yet another effort to more closely model the European system.
But “the European system” of that time included the 4 collectives and the scoring of the movements without a gait component, the US was not different than EU.
What changed and who were the players driving the change. I wish I had paid more attention to the politics back then.
3 Likes
Excuse me if I missed it while (admittedly) skimming, but I’m not shocked to see that 8 pages in not a single person on the Dressage Accessibility thread has listed a single thing they PERSONALLY could do to make dressage more accessible.
How many are in regular training with (and supporting) a local pro?
How many have ever personally gotten together to bring a clinic to their area?
How many have ever given somebody else a ride to a clinic, lesson, or show in their trailer without charging $50 to go 3.5 miles somewhere you’re going to anyway?
How many have ever let anyone else ride, learn on, or show their horse? Perish the thought!
Everyone wants dressage to be more accessible FOR THEM. Few have any interest whatsoever in making it more accessible for anyone else.
This thread being a prime example.
6 Likes
Perhaps folks with old copies of Dressage & CT might be able to find the article.
Do you mean Dressage Today? I have been a subscriber since their first issue. I gave away two HUGE boxes of old magazines to a friend recently.
Because it doesn’t need saying. I have been riding regularly with the same trainer for 16 years. I let a barn mate take lessons on my PSG horse for about two months while her horse was out with an injury. I DO charge for hauling because it’s not free to maintain and register a rig. The $50 per ride is much more affordable than owning their own (although tbh the main offender in this case makes more than I do, so I do this guilt free. I likely wouldn’t charge someone I saw struggling.)
2 Likes
OK, so memory doesn’t serve 
1 Like
Good for you. I suspect you are in a minority.
1 Like
How many are in regular training with (and supporting) a local pro?
Not anymore, I lack the scratch. I focus on feeding & caring for the elderly beasts I own.
How many have ever personally gotten together to bring a clinic to their area?
Check
How many have ever given somebody else a ride to a clinic, lesson, or show in their trailer without charging $50 to go 3.5 miles somewhere you’re going to anyway?
Check
How many have ever let anyone else ride, learn on, or show their horse? Perish the thought!
Check
But you know what my friends who were and still are involved with horses and riding today note - dressage shows cost too much and are no longer fun.
So we go trail riding and organize or participate in competitive trail rides instead. Crossing bridges, putting on a raincoat and taking it off, dragging fallen limbs, turns on the forehand, opening and closing gates and mailboxes, etc. Riding clubs are generally more fun, less costly and more egalitarian than dressage has become since the time I remember it being on the upswing. People liked how it was growing in the 1990’s thanks to the egalitarian belief (or marketing) that dressage was good for the horse and rider, plus at the lower levels any well-trained horse stood a chance of fair score and possibly a ribbon. Regardless of its breeding or color.
If USDF doesn’t see a looming problem then they must be generating enough money to meet their needs. I don’t know. Then again, when was the last time the Horse Council provided data with the number of horses registered annually, broken down by breed? I can’t recall, but I haven’t looked recently either.
4 Likes
Be careful. Technically you need a DOT # to do this, which you may have already. People have gotten heavily fined simply for hauling a horse for a friend in exchange for a meal.
I don’t think you’ve missed anything.
How many are in regular training with (and supporting) a local pro? Check
How many have ever personally gotten together to bring a clinic to their area? Check
How many have ever given somebody else a ride to a clinic, lesson, or show in their trailer without charging $50 to go 3.5 miles somewhere you’re going to anyway? Check
How many have ever let anyone else ride, learn on, or show their horse? Perish the thought! Check, although when it was the same horse I was showing and the other person was regressing the horse’s training I pulled them off.
I’ll add the following:
[B]Sponsor classes
Sponsor a rider
[I]Volunteer at shows
Volunteer with my GMO
Round up sponsors and prizes (thank you SoloShot)
Conduct fundraisers[/I][/B]
[B]Support shows to keep entries up
Support educational events (volunteer and attend)[/B]
Further edited to add the following based on @lorilu 's recommendations
[B]Graduated the L Program to further my education
Regularly scribe at schooling shows, rated shows and CDIs[/B]
The stuff in italics doesn’t cost anything other than time.
2 Likes
Me. Every single one. I also advocate for AAs at the Convention EVERY YEAR. I was also one of my GMO’s members who pushed to accept driven and western and gaited dressage in our schooling show series; I developed a division called “versatility” that includes a dressage test but also scores from trail, a timed event, prix caprilli, and dressage equitation scores - for the horses that may not excel at dressage but are good all arounders and deserve recognition at the awards banquet.
And you should add “audited an L program for the educational benefit” to your list. Or, “scribed for an upper level judge at a show”. Both have added immensly to my education, my understanding of the game, and in becoming educated, it has helped me improve my scores (on non-traditional horses).
Or, folks can just sit around and complain.
2 Likes
no, it was another magazine, it was wonderful…
1 Like
One problem with the rider tests is that they count in the three classes permitted at a USDF show. So, folks don’t ride them. They should.
