[QUOTE=meupatdoes;8018842]
Do you want to pitch this to them?
Horse Show Data Systems LLC??
Is startup capital a problem and if so can we get a COTH pool together?
I would definitely pitch in too, both for the software end and to pay for labor to enter past data.
[QUOTE=meupatdoes;8018842]
Do you want to pitch this to them?
Horse Show Data Systems LLC??
Is startup capital a problem and if so can we get a COTH pool together?
One of the kids at my college was a software programmer and actually sold the psychology department (I think) a statistics (I think) program they ordered from him for like $50,000.[/QUOTE]
Have you ever pitched an idea to them? It is interesting to say the least. I wish you luck because it is a good idea but you may just find your idea co-opted by someone in the club.
[QUOTE=Halt Near X;8018890]
Pitching it to them is down the line. It’s mostly stalled right now because there are legal questions I’d need to sort out before going any further/investing the time in doing the rest of the data entry.[/QUOTE]
Why do you need to do the data entry? I would try to sell them the program and let them hire people to enter the data.
[QUOTE=Halt Near X;8018688]
I got bored this summer and did a proof of concept with about a year’s worth of data. End result is the ability to see infractions by name, horse name, or show, as well as some generalized roll-up views (categories of infractions, like drugs vs conduct issues, and even counts of infractions by specific drug names).
That took about 2 weeks, mostly because the data entry is boring.
So I don’t see why USEF can’t do it. Even if they haven’t put that information in a database yet, it could be automated at least from 2008 forward. And USEF would also be able to link the infractions to USEF member numbers, which I couldn’t do with the information I had available to me.
It is just NOT that technically challenging. It really isn’t.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=meupatdoes;8018842]Do you want to pitch this to them?
Horse Show Data Systems LLC??
Is startup capital a problem and if so can we get a COTH pool together?
One of the kids at my college was a software programmer and actually sold the psychology department (I think) a statistics (I think) program they ordered from him for like $50,000.[/QUOTE]
Wow, this is great - its something that I’ve been conceptualizing in my own mind over the past year or so, too.
I’d love to help in any way I can - even if it’s to help do some of the boring data entry.
Basically, if you want to do this as a startup type thing, I want in.
Back to the microchipping…
Its not just because of a few notorious examples with imports, which led to a rule change anyway. No, it’s fairly common to have a perpetual Pre Green sold or leased a few states over to compete as a Pre Green. Again. If it’s a bay WB, who would know. I’m sure it happens with First and Second Years too but there are less of those then the huge number of PGs, harder to blend in. Many times owners buy a 7 or 8 year old or older with no history available to know if it is eligible Pre Green or Green, suspect many probably are not but after going thru a few owners and show name changes, nobody knows.
The absolute most blatant example I ever saw was a well know Pony that busted a measurement and ended up the tiniest Medium (I think it was a Medium second time around). They sat it out a couple of years, it went from grey to white, they showed up in the Midwest under another name as a GREEN and they sold it for a lot of money as a Green midway through that season. Lots if people did recognize it anyway but were afraid to speak up because of possible retribution, that trainer was very much one of the good old boys known to be nasty if crossed.
That crap is far more common then the non green imports. Permanent record attached to a chip number is the way to go.
And I will be happy to crowd fund overhauling the data to make it easily available. Lifetime member here…you still reading USEF?
[QUOTE=Halt Near X;8018688]
I got bored this summer and did a proof of concept with about a year’s worth of data. End result is the ability to see infractions by name, horse name, or show, as well as some generalized roll-up views (categories of infractions, like drugs vs conduct issues, and even counts of infractions by specific drug names).
That took about 2 weeks, mostly because the data entry is boring.
So I don’t see why USEF can’t do it. Even if they haven’t put that information in a database yet, it could be automated at least from 2008 forward. And USEF would also be able to link the infractions to USEF member numbers, which I couldn’t do with the information I had available to me.
It is just NOT that technically challenging. It really isn’t.[/QUOTE]
I applaud your work. But why wait for the USEF to bother getting around to taking it up? That information is publicly available, put it up online yourself, a la CenterlineScores. That certainly forced USDF’s hand on finally doing something similar of their own. It might not get you any money, but good luck getting that from USEF anyway.
[QUOTE=Kestrel;8018938]
[QUOTE=meupatdoes;8018842]Do you want to pitch this to them?
Horse Show Data Systems LLC??
Is startup capital a problem and if so can we get a COTH pool together?
I would definitely pitch in too, both for the software end and to pay for labor to enter past data.[/QUOTE]
Ditto. I would be happy to do some of the data entry if that becomes necessary.
[QUOTE=RockinHorse;8017423]
Agree with the micro chipping and especially doing away with the mileage rule :yes:[/QUOTE]
I also agree to get rid of the mileage rule. Encourage more B and C rated shows too.
[QUOTE=french fry;8019300]
[QUOTE=Kestrel;8018938]
Ditto. I would be happy to do some of the data entry if that becomes necessary.[/QUOTE]
Oh, wow! I just caught up on this thread. Count me in on all fronts. I’m pretty fast with data entry!
This exactly.
About removal of a microchip: it must be done with general anesthesia, not a local.
Also, the USEF will be working with an outside company beta testing a new database system, very similar to those used in Europe, over the next year or so. The USEF Horse Recording and ID Task Force is working toward a unique ID number for every horse competing in an approved show - it’s a beginning. See the newly updated rules GR 1101 and 1102 which were approved on 1/17/2015 at the annual meeting.
[QUOTE=adcurtiss;8018524]
I really like the idea about having a searchable trainer database with possible a list of students’ results under the trainer’s tutelage. It would make it easy to tell successful trainers from fakers, and I would also love to have a list of infractions if it applies.[/QUOTE]
You can look show records up for USHJA Certified Trainers.
It’s not perfect, by any means–ie if a student comes to a show and signs as their own trainer it won’t show up, but the general premise works pretty decently. But t a database that only includes show results of current students won’t provide an accurate picture of a trainer whose students don’t show, or show very little–this type of trainer will be overlooked, even if they started multiple Medal final winners. But it’s a start.
[QUOTE=mroades;8018621]
Except what about people like me, who have been assistants for BNT, and our name never goes on the entry blank?
I have sent many winners into the ring, but haven’t signed an antry blank for many of them over the years.
Not an argument, just a question?[/QUOTE]
Exactly.
[QUOTE=M. O’Connor;8021010]
You can look show records up for USHJA Certified Trainers.
It’s not perfect, by any means–ie if a student comes to a show and signs as their own trainer it won’t show up, but the general premise works pretty decently. But t a database that only includes show results of current students won’t provide an accurate picture of a trainer whose students don’t show, or show very little–this type of trainer will be overlooked, even if they started multiple Medal final winners. But it’s a start.[/QUOTE]
I can definitely see where this could become a problem. Didn’t think about that, interesting point.
Certification is tricky in that it applies only to full time trainers. While I understand why, it surely keeps many qualified people ineligible.
What I would suggest for the microchipping is to start by requiring it for a horse to be eligible for a year end award. Basically, require it for horses that are being campaigned at the big shows while keeping it optional for people taking their horses out to one or two shows a year. You could also make it a requirement for the green classes where the horse is only allowed one calendar year.
[QUOTE=Josh Taylor;8016151]
To kingoftheroad:
I understand that the timing of the live chat may not suit all those who would like to participate. This is a first attempt to reach out to our membership via live Facebook chats . If the forum is well received, I would be happy to schedule additional live chat sessions. Thank you for your interest.
Josh Taylor[/QUOTE]
Josh, I appreciate you coming by and posting here. I hope you also checked out the other thread on this topic that had many ideas.
I realize that you probably timeboxed the facebook chat for the purpose of not keeping it manageable within your schedule, but I would suggest that this kind of conversation is not well suited to “let’s chat for an hour and never ever chat again” 
as is commonly practiced. The COTH forums are actually admirably suited to longer conversations where real ideas can be developed with several people bouncing off them. Allowing a conversation to go for a day or a week will substantially increase the number of people who can participate and in my experience, also substantially increase the quality of the ideas, feedback, and interaction.
This is a great forum, or if USEF wanted to host their own BB, it is not all that difficult or expensive to set one up. (It can be hard to get a critical mass of traffic and interaction.)
When you guys at USEF have a question or an idea where you’d like feedback, why not just start a thread here and see how people react? It’s a great way to hear from a cross-section of the community. No, it’s not a statistically valid sample and you shouldn’t take what you hear from us as a gospel representation of All That Everyone Thinks. But it might help you develop some sense within USEF of what kind of feedback from membership would be useful, and could be incorporated.
That’s the number 1 issue I’ve heard from just about everyone … that USEF is something done to us not for us. That we have no ability to give any meaningful input on rules or policies, or to influence committees. Many of your amateur riders, regardless of how many or few ribbons they have at USEF, are talented professionals with a great deal of expertise that they’d give you for free if you are willing to listen.
You wanted to know earlier how to get people to be paying members. Giving them a vote on something other than Horseman of the Year would be very attractive to many people, even if that vote (on say rule changes) was not 100% binding or the only way rules could be changed.
[QUOTE=sylvan farm;8020231]
About removal of a microchip: it must be done with general anesthesia, not a local.
Also, the USEF will be working with an outside company beta testing a new database system, very similar to those used in Europe, over the next year or so. The USEF Horse Recording and ID Task Force is working toward a unique ID number for every horse competing in an approved show - it’s a beginning. See the newly updated rules GR 1101 and 1102 which were approved on 1/17/2015 at the annual meeting.[/QUOTE]
Well, that’s good to hear but wish I heard it from USEF a month ago instead of on here. I wonder if USEF could partner with Chronicle to release pertinent information on recently adopted rule changes and emergency rule change proposals? Would be much quicker and easier to access for the majority of members…and non members who still are involved in showing.
Perhaps they can get together on this.
[QUOTE=poltroon;8021855]
When you guys at USEF have a question or an idea where you’d like feedback, why not just start a thread here and see how people react? It’s a great way to hear from a cross-section of the community. No, it’s not a statistically valid sample and you shouldn’t take what you hear from us as a gospel representation of All That Everyone Thinks. But it might help you develop some sense within USEF of what kind of feedback from membership would be useful, and could be incorporated.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=findeight;8021993]I wonder if USEF could partner with Chronicle to release pertinent information on recently adopted rule changes and emergency rule change proposals? Would be much quicker and easier to access for the majority of members…and non members who still are involved in showing.
Perhaps they can get together on this.[/QUOTE]
I’ve said this before, but there are more people involved in the hunter/jumper industry who do NOT participate in this forum than those who do. And with good reason.
The USEF needs to find a way to transfer information to the community in a way that is professional and effective. The COTH forum is neither of those.
Incidentally, it’s not just the top professionals that are abusing the green divisions with recently imported horses. There is a horse at WEF right now showing in the baby greens that has been showing in 3’ divisions since 2013.
I had the digital and print copy of COTH in mind more then the Forums. Many people do read that. Weekly.
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
