spin-off: Leveling the Playing Field in Dressage

[netg]

@mvp

I think the “limit” divisions done by score are a fine idea.

Most folks want to come and compete (as well as get the judge’s comments so that they can see how their training is doing… at least on that day.). So make it an actual competition! Why not?

Agreed. I like the idea of it having to do with level shown, because I know as someone working my way up the levels there is a lot I am learning which will benefit me with my next horse, and should improve my scores with a future horse. It’s really the progress up levels which makes a huge difference in scores for other tests, to me. At least assuming you’re well taught as you progress, and not just “faking” it.

@ToN Farm

How many AA-only classes do you all see? Here in area 1, the only time I see AA-only classes are at the large shows. What’s more, AA’s in the same class with Open are not generally pinned separately here. The only advantage then to being an AA is if you are trying for some year end award.

Any kind of restricted classes are probably not a good idea because there are so few entries in most classes. Again, except for big shows (and training/first level) there are usually only 4-5 people in the class and often less.

Here they are pinned separately, and only made into separate classes run at different times if necessary for scheduling because of conflicts pros have in timing. At a big enough show, they might also be run as separate classes so they can be held in different rings. Especially training and first level tend to be huge classes compared to other classes.

@cnm161

I dunno, guys. The huge gaits usually (not always) come with a brain that requires a tactful ride in order to produce relaxation. You can spend all the money you want, but if you can’t defuse some of that tension, you’re still going to get those darn 4s and 5s anyway. I know; I’ve ridden my own lovely-moving mare to really low scores due to tension that crept into every movement (darn you, chaotic warmup-- and my own mismanagement, I guess).

Where you’re double-screwed is if you have a tense, limited-moving horse. That’s a double whammy of bad news for your scores.

But that’s where the expensive horses come in - the huge gaits are paired with a swinging back in a high dollar horse. In a lower dollar horse, that has to be developed. It’s really an excellent feat of breeding.

I think if movement is counted as part of the score, CORRECT movement needs to be, not just height of the suspension and height of the knees. Right now, good gaits are defined as flamboyant gaits rather than as correct gaits. I remember several years ago an L candidate asking a well known judge how she scored a horse with a very flashy trot lengthening in 1st 3. The judge turned it around and asked the L candidate how she would. And talked it through her as “well, you can’t give the horse a 10 because it was behind the vertical, but I’d give it a 9.” Except the hind legs were basically never coming under the horse. This horse later had a suspensory injury, and if the correlation people like Gerd Heuschmann have made is true, the pushing from behind while on the forehand was part of what caused it. (Note: that was the horse’s NATURAL way of going, not rider-induced.) The rider of this horse did a wonderful job with rehab and focus on getting the hind end working more correctly, but that took a lot of time and effort, and the front does not look as flashy as it did when the horse was incorrect! I think the horse looks far better, personally, though, and the horse is sound and happier in its work. If judging were really correct, I would think this horse would get far higher scores for gaits now - but I suspect that is not the case. And THAT is the problem I see with judging based on “movement.” It’s not movement quality being scored, it’s flash.

[alibi_18]

@Manni01

I agree!!! I admit I got a blue ribbon this weekend in the AA class, because I was the only one, but still I am not really proud to earn a blue ribbon… Ok it was a first time at a rated show in that level and I came fairly close to my goal, but I still missed it I don’t think I earned a blue ribbon…

Not sure of the rule in the US, but here in Canada, you have to get a score over 60% (or 65%?) to get a 1rst place when you are alone in a class and so, you could get a 2d, 3rd or 4th place depending on your score.

Isn’t that the same?

[Manni01]

@alibi_18

Not sure of the rule in the US, but here in Canada, you have to get a score over 60% (or 65%?) to get a 1rst place when you are alone in a class and so, you could get a 2d, 3rd or 4th place depending on your score.

Isn’t that the same?

Honestly I have no idea… I got a 59,2 in 4th level and the show secretary gave me the blue ribbon… Maybe it was a mistake… I wouldn’t mind if I wouldn’t get it…

[yaya]

@alibi_18

Not sure of the rule in the US, but here in Canada, you have to get a score over 60% (or 65%?) to get a 1rst place when you are alone in a class and so, you could get a 2d, 3rd or 4th place depending on your score.

Isn’t that the same?

In the US, ribbons are given in the order of the scores (highest score gets first, next highest gets second, etc.), so if you are the only one in the class, you place first, no matter what your score is.

[JLR1]

I noticed some of the California Dressage shows offer leveled classes based on a riders age etc and that those classes are typically one or two horse classes. For people who want to come home with a pretty ribbon I think those classes are great. For me personally I’m less interested in ribbons and placings and have a set personal goal regarding scores. I could show in the old lady Over 50 classes or breed specific Arabian classes, but would rather have my horse and I judged in a group of generic adult amateurs. Knowing how his training stacks up against bigger, generally warmbloods is part of what I expect from a show. Sometimes we are in the middle of the pack and sometimes we win. I think dressage would be more appealing to people not based on leveled classes, but rather in realizing this is a sport of personal and achievable goals, similar to golf. Winning a class is no doubt an exhilarating feeling, but so is attaining the score you hoped for, or getting a performance certificate or medal. The journey really is everything and I feel sorry for the people who are only focused on winning.

[Manni01]

@JLR1

I noticed some of the California Dressage shows offer leveled classes based on a riders age etc and that those classes are typically one or two horse classes. For people who want to come home with a pretty ribbon I think those classes are great. For me personally I’m less interested in ribbons and placings and have a set personal goal regarding scores. I could show in the old lady Over 50 classes or breed specific Arabian classes, but would rather have my horse and I judged in a group of generic adult amateurs. Knowing how his training stacks up against bigger, generally warmbloods is part of what I expect from a show. Sometimes we are in the middle of the pack and sometimes we win. I think dressage would be more appealing to people not based on leveled classes, but rather in realizing this is a sport of personal and achievable goals, similar to golf. Winning a class is no doubt an exhilarating feeling, but so is attaining the score you hoped for, or getting a performance certificate or medal. The journey really is everything and I feel sorry for the people who are only focused on winning.

I agree with you. Since I came to the US, the main color of my ribbons is blue… When I was showing in Germany we always had classes of 20 to 40 riders. There it is a big joy to even get a ribbon. The winning ribbon is the icing on the cake. But in Classes of 1 its boring. I am excited when I get my ride times and there are 4 in my class… So the only way to look at it are the scores… And I don’t like the open/AA separation as well because of all the disadvantages it means for AA riders who are not super rich!!

[millerra]

But but but (and I’m not whining - I don’t show dressage except to event)…
As judges have indicated - it is NOT about training, at least at the lower levels. If a “6” mover starts at a 6 for each movement and and “8” mover starts at an 8 - that’s a 20% point difference to play with. For simplicity, just to tie, the rider on the 6 mover has to do better by 10% points- be 10% better, more correct, better trained and the person on the 8 mover has to screw up/make mistakes or have holes in the training by 10% - just to TIE.

So, bluntly put - showing/placing is not a comparative measure of training. Yes, can you get comments about your training and how your horse is progressing, but to compare training to others is now relatively meaningless because the starting point is based on the movement/talent of the beastie you are sitting on.

I find this a bit… well… at least I can shake it off and go Xcountry…

[MysticOakRanch]

@JLR1

I noticed some of the California Dressage shows offer leveled classes based on a riders age etc and that those classes are typically one or two horse classes. For people who want to come home with a pretty ribbon I think those classes are great. For me personally I’m less interested in ribbons and placings and have a set personal goal regarding scores. I could show in the old lady Over 50 classes or breed specific Arabian classes, but would rather have my horse and I judged in a group of generic adult amateurs. Knowing how his training stacks up against bigger, generally warmbloods is part of what I expect from a show. Sometimes we are in the middle of the pack and sometimes we win. I think dressage would be more appealing to people not based on leveled classes, but rather in realizing this is a sport of personal and achievable goals, similar to golf. Winning a class is no doubt an exhilarating feeling, but so is attaining the score you hoped for, or getting a performance certificate or medal. The journey really is everything and I feel sorry for the people who are only focused on winning.

This is the Junior Championship show - there are 2 of these shows (one South, one North), and the classes are split by age, so the younger kids (like 12 years old) aren’t competing against the 18 or 21 year old riders at the lower levels. It is a show for Juniors/Young Riders, and yes, at that age, a ribbon is a big deal, and encouraging and acknowledging youth IS the intent of the show. Some of those divisions can be big and super competitive too. I volunteer at that show almost every year, proud of our GMO for recognizing our youth!

I’m in California, and for most of our shows, we compete against all divisions - unless it is a big show where there are enough entries to justify splitting the class. I don’t see a lot of “one competitor, blue ribbon” classes, except at the smaller shows where you might only have one person showing 4th level (the hated level), or one person showing above PSG. I never see the small classes split by AA, Open, and Jr/YR.

[MysticOakRanch]

@millerra

But but but (and I’m not whining - I don’t show dressage except to event)…
As judges have indicated - it is NOT about training, at least at the lower levels. If a “6” mover starts at a 6 for each movement and and “8” mover starts at an 8 - that’s a 20% point difference to play with. For simplicity, just to tie, the rider on the 6 mover has to do better by 10% points- be 10% better, more correct, better trained and the person on the 8 mover has to screw up/make mistakes or have holes in the training by 10% - just to TIE.

So, bluntly put - showing/placing is not a comparative measure of training. Yes, can you get comments about your training and how your horse is progressing, but to compare training to others is now relatively meaningless because the starting point is based on the movement/talent of the beastie you are sitting on.

I find this a bit… well… at least I can shake it off and go Xcountry…

Yes, I commented on this on page 2 - the only way to kind of “level the playing field” is to get away from this way of judging. BUT - this is driven by the FEI, so it is unlikely to happen. This is exactly how the judges are suppose to judge - whether we like it or not. The bigger moving horses have the advantage from the start. Audit an L program, you’ll hear it directly from the Faculty who teach the future judges…

[trubandloki]

@Manni01

Honestly I have no idea… I got a 59,2 in 4th level and the show secretary gave me the blue ribbon… Maybe it was a mistake… I wouldn’t mind if I wouldn’t get it…

There is always the option for not taking the ribbon if you do not think you deserve the ribbon.

[ToN_Farm]

@millerra

So, bluntly put - showing/placing is not a comparative measure of training. Yes, can you get comments about your training and how your horse is progressing, but to compare training to others is now relatively meaningless because the starting point is based on the movement/talent of the beastie you are sitting on.

Exactly. For this reason, I don’t see a point for some of us to bother showing. Showing just to a get score or improve your score doesn’t tell too much either. When the top horses in the class are getting 70%+ and the ordinary horses are getting low 60’s, what does that tell you about your training, if you are on one of the ordinary ones? Not much imo.

And really, it’s not that ‘the training’ isn’t being consdidered either because more often than not the top horses have good training and the riders (aa or not) are good riders. Good riders generally buy good horses because good riders generally become good riders by getting good training that takes money. It almost always comes down to money in the end for many things.

[mvp]

@millerra

But but but (and I’m not whining - I don’t show dressage except to event)…
As judges have indicated - it is NOT about training, at least at the lower levels. If a “6” mover starts at a 6 for each movement and and “8” mover starts at an 8 - that’s a 20% point difference to play with. For simplicity, just to tie, the rider on the 6 mover has to do better by 10% points- be 10% better, more correct, better trained and the person on the 8 mover has to screw up/make mistakes or have holes in the training by 10% - just to TIE.

So, bluntly put - showing/placing is not a comparative measure of training. Yes, can you get comments about your training and how your horse is progressing, but to compare training to others is now relatively meaningless because the starting point is based on the movement/talent of the beastie you are sitting on.

I find this a bit… well… at least I can shake it off and go Xcountry…

I agree with this, and perhaps, too the comment by MysticOakRanch about the FEI dictating the judging criteria.

That makes me think that the FEI works for the European breeding industry. That’s an impressively well-organized example of selective breeding they got going on over there. And if the FEI is the body that produces “performance testing” for the stock breeders produce, then it might be that one ought to understand (even American) competitive Dressage as part of an industry that is more like the AQHA world than USEF world. What I mean is that the AQHA is primarily a breed organization. It creates shows (and divisions and, I suppose, judging criteria) that creates a market for the horses its breeders produce. If the FEI similarly creates the venue and criteria that supports European breeders, and if their product is a horse that moves this way rather than that, then the emphasis on gaits will not leave. After all, that’s what breeders produce: gaits (and, I suppose, rideable minds). They are not in the business of selling training.

What I do wish is that dressage scoring would get back to the business of identifying and rewarding the effects of good training.

[mvp]

@ToN Farm

Exactly. For this reason, I don’t see a point for some of us to bother showing. Showing just to a get score or improve your score doesn’t tell too much either. When the top horses in the class are getting 70%+ and the ordinary horses are getting low 60’s, what does that tell you about your training, if you are on one of the ordinary ones? Not much imo.

And really, it’s not that ‘the training’ isn’t being consdidered either because more often than not the top horses have good training and the riders (aa or not) are good riders. Good riders generally buy good horses because good riders generally become good riders by getting good training that takes money. It almost always comes down to money in the end for many things.

I’m the first in line to complain about the “halo effect” produced by wealth. And you give an example of it here: Not only to the rich buy better raw material in their horses than the rest of us can afford, but they also buy better/more training and instruction for themselves.

I can live with the unfairness of those wealthy riders having more opportunity to buy professional help. After all, they still have to accept that help and ride their horse, just like I do. And I’m scrappy: I can wring a lot of progress out of a lesson or go to the gym on the cheap and get strong in my core.

But! I’d feel adequately helped and welcomed by the showing industry if we could go back to what I took to be the way judging worked in the 1980s and 1990s where each horse was judged on the extent to which he could use the body he had. If a horse with bad gaits was pulling a virtual miracle out of his ass with some extension or adding a bit of leap to his canter because he had been taught and strengthened up to do that, then they judge could appreciate and reward that.

I ride (and show) because I like the project of training and improving a horse. I don’t want to stay in a discipline that’s about anything other than that.

[pluvinel]

How long Dressage & CT Magazine been gone? Maybe +25 years???

In the old Dressage & CT Magazine, Max Gahwyler wrote an article discussing how a horse with “bling gaits” would place above a better trained horse. So the effect of emphasis on gaits has been around a while…to the detriment of dressage as a test a horse’s training…remember when Anky’s horses couldn’t/wouldn’t halt?

In my book, regardless of what anyone says, dressage has moved away from being a test of a horse’s training.

Having learned to ride in the 1970’s under the tutelage of an old cavalry colonel, I remember my shock at a Sally O’Connor clinic when she stated that a horse with better gaits would win a test. My bubble was busted.

So yes, I would agree that removing the emphasis on “gaits” would have a leveling effect. A good moving horse could get a few additional points in the Collective Marks, but it would not be an overwhelming driver of the score, thus giving a well-trained, but less bling-moving animal be competitive.

[MysticOakRanch]

@mvp

But! I’d feel adequately helped and welcomed by the showing industry if we could go back to what I took to be the way judging worked in the 1980s and 1990s where each horse was judged on the extent to which he could use the body he had. If a horse with bad gaits was pulling a virtual miracle out of his ass with some extension or adding a bit of leap to his canter because he had been taught and strengthened up to do that, then they judge could appreciate and reward that.

Well, a slight clarification, because that was not how it was judged back in the 80s or 90s. Judges do not have the breadth of knowledge to know what EACH horse was capable of individually. I don’t think that could ever be the standard that is used. Back in the 80s and 90s, the standard was that each movement was separately judged based on the requirements for THAT movement - the scope and fanciness of the gaits were not relevant except in the few “brilliance” movements like the extended trot. Then the gaits were scored in the individual collectives box down at the bottom of the test.

So a fancy horse might get an extra couple of points in that collective mark (which I believe had a coefficient of 3 back then). So of course, they had a SLIGHT advantage because they’d pick up an extra 6 points (gaits of 8 versus 6, x coefficent of 3) for their gaits, and they might pick up an extra 4 to 8 points for those brilliance movements. That translates to maybe 4% extra. Meanwhile, a less fancy horse could pick up points on the technical movements, such as the TOH, or just on good halts, and it wasn’t hard to be competitive on a less fancy horse. The fancier horse had a slight advantage, but not the 10% to 20% advantage it has under the current judging methodology.

And yes, I absolutely agree mvp, that this is driven in good part by the European Warmblood breeding market. As I stated before, I love watching a well ridden, fancy horse, and I don’t mind that horse wins the class - my issue is that they get SUCH an advantage just for the big, scopey gaits… I prefer the old method of judging too. I saw it starting to change in the late 90s and early 2000s. I went through the L program to get an understanding of WHY the judging had changed. And yes, I learned that a horse with 8 gaits starts off with a higher score then a horse with 6 gaits. Gaits first. Where it use to be training first - as long as the rider hadn’t created impure gaits.

[MysticOakRanch]

@ToN Farm

It almost always comes down to money in the end for many things.

Isn’t that the truth!

[merrygoround]

I’m still vastly amused by the local “trainer” who loudly trumpeted her students blue ribbons at a schooling show. What was not trumpeted were the actual scores, and the info that they were the only riders, in their classes.

Most of us go for the scores. I hope!

[ToN_Farm]

I can’t speak for what was going on in the whole county, but I was around riding in the 80’s and long before that. Granted I was doing eventing then, so only doing dressage schooling shows. I don’t think there were all that many ‘recognized’ dressage shows in the 70’s and 80’s. Does anyone know? In my area (which is NJ and a very horsey state), the majority of horses in dressage classes were not warmbloods. There were many TB’s. While there are some great TB’s, most move similarly. Dressage scores were not high. I never saw a 70 in those days. If you got a 60% you were real happy. The point I’m trying to make (albeit poorly) is that there just wasn’t the number of horses and the quality back then such that the playing field was a lot more level. I remember seeing an old photo of the warmup ring at Dressage at Devon and omg there were horses inverted, etc.

Also I was told the reason the Gait score came about was that in the early days many horses did not have 3 pure gaits. It was to judge purity, not scope.

[Manni01]

Ok I hope its not to controversial but its my opinion. Somehow the discussion is always going in the same direction… Warmblood gaits against Non Warmbloods. And then the big talk about gaits…

My personal opinion and what I see on shows… And something I noticed when I started to show in the 70s in Germany. At that time not every horse had amazing gaits. Most of them didn’t. And by the way not every horse was on the bit… Usually you got a ribbon if your horse was on the bit and did the movement more or less correct.
But what I wanted to say… At that time it was not about gaits… It was about riding the test expressive!!!
You can ride a test and your horse looks like its going to die any moment or you can ride a test with a horse which looks like its going to explode any moment (the art is that it doesn’t explode )

Most tests are somewhere in between. I believe and I also believe that is still true, if your horse is expressive it does not need to have amazing gaits. The judge will give him good scores. Most people in these discussions are only talking about symmetry, and riding everything correct. So how do they ride at home?? Do they practice circles all the time???

I have a different philosophy… I survive if I mess up my circles and I also survive if something odd happens in my test. I want my horse to look beautiful!!! I do not really think that all my horses have amazing gaits. Some have more and some have less Quality gaits, but still where ever I go, Judges complement me on my talented horses… I believe its the way to present them… I always try to ride them like they are auction horses who are supposed to bring a lot of money…
And any horse can be expressive if you give him the chance… And that is the point IMO Its not about the basic quality of gaits, but it more how you as a rider are able to let your horse move in the best possible way…
And that is really what the pyramid of training is for. To develope the existing potential of your horse…
Most horses I see who do not have nice gait are missing something from the pyramid of training…

So I believe its unfortunate to only talk about the quality of gaits… Its more then just talent of the horse…

[Heinz_57]

@merrygoround

I’m still vastly amused by the local “trainer” who loudly trumpeted her students blue ribbons at a schooling show. What was not trumpeted were the actual scores, and the info that they were the only riders, in their classes.

Most of us go for the scores. I hope!

Ah, this goes on everywhere. My social media accounts are flooded with huge brag posts and pictures of ribbons during show season, never a mention of actual score or class size. And I don’t mind it coming from the average ammy rider that is just proud of putting in a good effort and having a successful show, but I feel it’s somewhat deceitful when used as an advertising ploy for a professional or program. I had the displeasure of scribing for this type of ride last year, a single rider in the class with a low 40’s score. Brag post appeared on FB just a few hours later, gushing over the win.

That said, I too am disappointed at the current scoring methodology and I think removing the emphasis on gaits, or perhaps changing the way gaits are scored, would certainly bring the playing field closer to level. It’ll never happen, though! :lol: